INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION

This section states the penalties for violating subsection (1.1) of the Criminal Code, with a maximum imprisonment of two years or a fine of up to $2,000 for summary convictions.

SECTION WORDING

487.08(4) Every person who contravenes subsection (1.1) (a) is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years; or (b) is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction and liable to a fine not exceeding $2,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months, or to both.

EXPLANATION

Section 487.08(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada is a provision that describes the penalties for contravening subsection 1.1, which deals with the failure to comply with the requirements of a demand made by a peace officer under certain circumstances. Under this section, any person who fails to comply with the provisions of subsection 1.1(a) is guilty of an indictable offense and can be imprisoned for a maximum term of two years. Alternatively, if they are found guilty under subsection 1.1(b), they can be punished with a fine not exceeding $2,000, imprisonment for a maximum term of six months, or both. Subsection 1.1 of section 487.08 deals with situations where a peace officer has reasonable grounds to believe that a person has committed an offense, and demands that person to provide evidence that will help in the investigation. This can include providing identification, allowing a search of their vehicle, or providing a breath sample to determine if they have consumed alcohol. The penalties under section 487.08(4) are designed to deter individuals from failing to comply with the demands of a peace officer. By holding offenders accountable for their actions, the justice system hopes to ensure that law enforcement officials are able to conduct investigations fairly and effectively, without obstruction or interference. Overall, section 487.08(4) is an important provision in the Criminal Code of Canada that plays a critical role in maintaining law and order in the country. It serves as a reminder to all individuals that they must comply with the lawful demands of peace officers, or face serious consequences.

COMMENTARY

Section 487.08(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada deals with the offence of failing to comply with a warrant authorizing the seizure of electronic devices or data. It is a serious offence that carries significant penalties. The section allows for two different types of punishment, depending on whether the offence is treated as an indictable offence or a summary offence. If the offence is treated as an indictable offence, the individual is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years. This is the more serious of the two options and reflects the gravity of the offence. Failing to comply with a warrant that authorizes law enforcement officials to search and seize electronic devices or data undermines the integrity of the investigative process and can lead to the loss of crucial evidence. It is essential that individuals comply with such warrants to ensure that law enforcement officials can carry out their duties effectively. If the offence is treated as a summary conviction offence, the individual is liable to a fine not exceeding $2,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months, or to both. This is a less severe punishment than that imposed for an indictable offence, but it is still a serious matter. Even a summary conviction offence can result in a criminal record and have long-term consequences for an individual's life. It is worth noting that subsection (1.1) of section 487.08 deals with the power of law enforcement officials to obtain warrants to search and seize electronic devices or data. Providing false or misleading information to obtain such a warrant is also a criminal offence under this subsection. Section 487.08(4) highlights the importance of compliance with legal processes and the authority of law enforcement officials. It recognizes that the search and seizure of electronic devices or data can be a highly intrusive action, but it is necessary in certain circumstances to ensure that the justice system can operate effectively. Failing to comply with a warrant not only undermines the investigation at hand but also sets a dangerous precedent for future investigations. Overall, section 487.08(4) acts as a deterrent to non-compliance with warrants authorizing the search and seizure of electronic devices or data. The penalties imposed for such offences reflect the gravity of the situation and the importance of maintaining the integrity of the investigation. Individuals must be aware of their legal responsibilities and obligations in such circumstances to ensure that justice is served.

STRATEGY

Section 487.08(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada is an important provision in Canadian criminal law. It outlines the offence of failing to comply with a warrant, and provides the potential consequences for those who are found guilty of such a breach. When dealing with this section of the Criminal Code, there are a number of strategic considerations that need to be taken into account. One of the most important strategic considerations is understanding the scope of the section itself. It is important to understand what constitutes a breach of a warrant, as well as what the potential penalties are for such a breach. This is critical information when developing a legal strategy, as it can provide the framework for how to approach the case. Another strategic consideration is understanding the strengths and weaknesses of the case. If an individual has been charged with failing to comply with a warrant, the key to mounting a strong defence is to understand where the weaknesses in the Crown's case lie. This may involve scrutinizing the warrant itself, looking for technical errors or mistakes in the execution of the warrant, or examining the evidence that was obtained as a result of the breach. Another potential strategic consideration is plea bargaining. In some cases, it may be advantageous to negotiate a plea bargain with the Crown. This might involve admitting to some of the charges, but in exchange for a reduced punishment. Because of the potential for severe consequences, it is critical to approach plea bargaining in a strategic manner to minimize harm to the accused. Lastly, it may be important to consider the potential impact of a conviction on future opportunities for those who are found guilty of this offence. Employers, landlords, and other entities conducting background checks may see a conviction for this offence as a red flag, which could put limits on future professional or educational opportunities. Considering this potential for adverse consequences when developing a legal strategy can help individuals make the most informed decisions possible. In terms of strategies that could be employed, there are a number of options available to those who are facing charges under this section of the Criminal Code. These include: 1. Challenging the warrant: As previously mentioned, one of the key ways to mount a strong defence is to scrutinize the warrant for any errors or mistakes. A skilled criminal defence lawyer can carefully examine the warrant to determine whether it was properly executed or whether there are any other weaknesses in the Crown's case. 2. Seeking a stay of proceedings: In some cases, it may be possible to argue that the Crown has violated the accused's constitutional rights. A skilled defence lawyer may be able to argue that the warrant was obtained unlawfully or that the evidence obtained as a result of the breach should be excluded from the trial. If successful, this would effectively end the case. 3. Plea bargaining: As previously mentioned, there may be situations where it makes sense to negotiate a plea bargain with the Crown. This would involve admitting to some of the charges in exchange for a reduced sentence or punishment. 4. Defending against the charges in court: In some cases, the best strategy may be to mount a full defence against the charges in court. A skilled defence lawyer can present evidence, witnesses, and arguments to demonstrate that the accused did not violate the terms of the warrant and that the Crown has not met the necessary burden of proof. Overall, when dealing with section 487.08(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada, it is critical to approach the case with a strategic mindset. By understanding the potential implications of a conviction, identifying the strengths and weaknesses of the Crown's case, and developing smart legal strategies, individuals facing charges under this section can work towards the best possible outcome.