section 667(2)

INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION

A copy of a summary conviction or discharge is sufficient evidence of a conviction or discharge without further proof of signature or official character.

SECTION WORDING

667(2) In any proceedings, a copy of the summary conviction or discharge under section 730 in Canada of an offender, signed by the person who made the conviction or order for the discharge or by the clerk of the court in which the conviction or order for the discharge was made, is, on proof that the accused or defendant is the offender referred to in the copy of the summary conviction, evidence of the conviction or discharge under section 730 of the accused or defendant, without proof of the signature or the official character of the person appearing to have signed it.

EXPLANATION

Section 667(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada enables the admission of summary convictions or discharges as evidence in any criminal proceedings. In legal terms, a summary conviction refers to a minor criminal offense that is usually punishable by a fine, imprisonment for a short period or both. On the other hand, a discharge under section 730 refers to an order by the court to prematurely terminate a criminal proceeding without finding the defendant guilty. Under this section, a copy of the summary conviction or discharge, signed by either the person who made the conviction or order for discharge or by the court clerk, can serve as evidence of the conviction or discharge without requiring proof of the signature or official character of the person signing it. The provision is particularly significant in situations where a person has been previously convicted or discharged of a minor offense and is subsequently facing charges for a more serious crime. In such cases, the court can use the previous conviction or discharge as evidence against the accused without the need for further proof of the underlying charge. Overall, Section 667(2) is an essential component of the Canadian justice system as it streamlines the court's processes by making the admission of summary convictions or discharges easier, ensuring that justice is served more efficiently.

COMMENTARY

Section 667(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada provides a legal mechanism for establishing prior convictions or discharges under section 730 in Canada of an offender. It allows for proof of the conviction or discharge without the need for additional proof of the validity of the document, such as the signature of the person who made the conviction or order for discharge. This provision is important in criminal proceedings as prior convictions and discharges may have an impact on bail, sentencing, and other aspects of the trial. Proving these prior convictions or discharges can be time-consuming and costly for courts and prosecutors, and may delay the trial process. The use of a copy of a summary conviction or discharge provides a streamlined approach for demonstrating an offender's prior record. Such documentation can be readily obtained from the relevant courts and can be presented as evidence in court. The provision also clarifies that proof of the signature or official character of the person appearing to have signed the document is not necessary, which further simplifies the process of introducing this evidence into court proceedings. This means that the prosecution does not need to provide an additional layer of proof that the document is authentic. However, it is important to note that the provision only applies to summary convictions and discharges under section 730 in Canada. This means that it does not extend to convictions or discharges from outside of Canada or those that do not fall under the summary category. Overall, section 667(2) is a practical provision that streamlines the proof of prior convictions or discharges under section 730 in Canada. This provision reduces costs and delays in the trial process, while maintaining the integrity of the evidence presented in court.

STRATEGY

Section 667(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada is a powerful tool available to prosecutors in criminal proceedings. This section permits the use of a copy of a summary conviction or discharge under Section 730 as prima facie evidence of the conviction or discharge under Section 730 in Canada for the accused. However, the use of this section can present strategic considerations and challenges. One strategic consideration when dealing with Section 667(2) is ensuring the copy of the summary conviction or discharge is properly authenticated and admissible. Section 667(2) states that the copy must be signed by the person who made the conviction or order for the discharge or by the clerk of the court in which the conviction or order for the discharge was made. Therefore, prosecutors must ensure that the copy they are relying on meets these requirements, or the evidence will not be admissible. Another strategic consideration is determining when to use Section 667(2). Prosecutors must decide whether to use this section early in the proceedings or wait until later. Using Section 667(2) early in the proceedings may put pressure on the defence to consider a plea bargain or settlement. However, using it later may allow the prosecutor to gather additional evidence first, which could strengthen their case. A further strategic consideration is the potential impact on the accused's credibility. A prior conviction may undermine the accused's credibility, making it more difficult for them to testify in their own defence. Prosecutors may use Section 667(2) to impeach the accused's credibility by showing they have a prior conviction for a similar crime. The defence, on the other hand, may argue that the conviction is not relevant or that it prejudices the accused. One strategy that could be employed by a prosecutor is to build their case around the prior conviction. They could use the prior conviction to show that the accused has a pattern of committing similar crimes, which could strengthen their case. Alternatively, a prosecutor may choose to downplay the prior conviction, depending on the facts of the case, to avoid the risk of prejudicing the accused or having the conviction deemed inadmissible. Defence counsel may also employ strategies when Section 667(2) is used in a case. One strategy is to argue that the prior conviction is not relevant or that it prejudices the accused, and therefore, it should not be admitted into evidence. Defence counsel could also argue that the copy of the summary conviction or discharge is inadmissible due to non-compliance with Section 667(2). Moreover, a defendant may choose to address their prior conviction head-on. They may use it as an opportunity to take responsibility for their actions, apologize for their past behaviour and demonstrate that they have taken steps to change their behaviour. This could potentially reduce their sentence or impact the perception of the accused by the court. In summary, Section 667(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada provides a powerful tool for prosecutors, but its use involves strategic considerations. Both prosecution and defence lawyers must weigh the advantages and disadvantages of relying on a prior conviction to build their case or to undermine the case of their opponent. Effective use of Section 667(2) may ultimately depend on the specific circumstances of the case, and lawyers must approach its use strategically rather than blindly rely on it as evidence.