section 679(3)

INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION

This section allows for the release of an appellant pending appeal if certain conditions are met.

SECTION WORDING

679(3) In the case of an appeal referred to in paragraph (1)(a) or (c), the judge of the court of appeal may order that the appellant be released pending the determination of his appeal if the appellant establishes that (a) the appeal or application for leave to appeal is not frivolous; (b) he will surrender himself into custody in accordance with the terms of the order; and (c) his detention is not necessary in the public interest.

EXPLANATION

Section 679(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada addresses an appellant's right to be released from detention while waiting for their appeal to be determined. The section outlines three criteria that the appellant must meet before a judge can order their release. Firstly, the appellant must demonstrate that their appeal is not frivolous. This means that the appeal has a reasonable chance of success and is not being brought forward for the sole purpose of delaying justice. Secondly, the appellant must agree to surrender themselves into custody as required by the terms of the order. This is to ensure that the appellant does not attempt to flee or otherwise evade justice while released. Finally, the judge must also be satisfied that the appellant's detention is not necessary in the public interest. This can be a complex balance of considerations, weighing the potential risk that the appellant poses to society against their individual rights and the need for due process. Overall, section 679(3) provides an important safeguard for individuals who have been detained pending an appeal. It ensures that those awaiting the outcome of their appeal are not unduly punished or deprived of their liberty without appropriate justification. At the same time, it recognizes that there may be circumstances in which detention is necessary for the protection of society and allows judges to make informed decisions based on the specific circumstances of each case.

COMMENTARY

Section 679(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada is an important provision that governs the release of appellants pending the determination of their appeal in certain circumstances. Specifically, this provision allows a judge to order the release of an appellant who meets specific criteria, namely that their appeal is not frivolous, they will surrender themselves into custody according to the terms of the order, and their detention is not necessary in the public interest. This provision is important because it balances the interests of the state in ensuring that defendants who have been convicted of crimes abide by the judicial process and do not pose a risk to public safety, with the interests of defendants in being able to challenge their conviction without undue hardship. The provision recognizes that not all appellants represent a risk to society or are likely to abscond, and that it is not in the interests of justice or public safety to detain them pending the determination of their appeal. There are several key elements of this provision that merit further discussion. First, the requirement that the appeal is not frivolous recognizes that not all appeals have a realistic chance of success and that it is not in the interests of the administration of justice to allow appellants to use the appeal process as a means of delaying their sentence or avoiding the consequences of their actions. This criterion allows judges to weed out frivolous appeals and ensure that only meritorious appeals proceed. Second, the requirement that the appellant will surrender themselves into custody according to the terms of the order recognizes that defendants who have been convicted of crimes have a duty to abide by the law and not seek to evade the consequences of their actions. This requirement ensures that appellants will abide by the terms of their release and not pose a risk to public safety or the administration of justice. Finally, the requirement that the appellant's detention is not necessary in the public interest is perhaps the most important criterion in this provision. It recognizes that detention is a serious deprivation of liberty that must be justified by the interests of justice and public safety. This requirement allows judges to take into account all relevant factors when considering whether to grant an appellant's release, including the seriousness of the offence, the risk of flight, and any other factors that may be relevant to the public interest. In conclusion, Section 679(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada is an important provision that recognizes the right of appellants to challenge their convictions while at the same time balancing the interests of justice and public safety. This provision, along with other provisions governing the administration of criminal justice, ensures that the rights of accused persons are protected while at the same time maintaining the integrity of the system and ensuring that public safety remains paramount.

STRATEGY

Section 679(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada provides a mechanism for an accused person to seek their release while they prepare for an appeal. This section allows the judge of the court of appeal to release the appellant on certain conditions, if they can satisfy the requirements outlined in this section. However, there are several strategic considerations that need to be taken into account when dealing with this section. This article highlights some of the strategic considerations that should be considered when making an application under Section 679(3). The first strategic consideration is to ensure that the appeal or application for leave to appeal is not frivolous. The onus is on the appellant to prove to the court that their appeal is not frivolous. This means that the court must be satisfied that there are genuine issues of law, fact, or mixed law and fact that warrant further consideration. One strategy to establish this point is to focus on the key legal issues and grounds for appeal. It is essential to demonstrate to the court why the errors made at trial warrant further consideration by the appellate court. The second strategic consideration is to demonstrate that the appellant will surrender themselves into custody in accordance with the terms of the order. This means that the conditions of release must be followed strictly. If the appellant breaches any of these conditions, they may be returned to custody immediately. To ensure compliance, the appellant may be required to provide security, such as a cash deposit or a surety. An experienced criminal lawyer can help the appellant to navigate this process and arrange for suitable bail conditions. The third strategic consideration is to demonstrate that the appellant's detention is not necessary in the public interest. This means that the court must be satisfied that the appellant's release would not pose a risk to public safety or the administration of justice. In some cases, the court may require the appellant to provide assurances that they will not commit any further offences or that they will comply with certain conditions, such as house arrest or electronic monitoring. Some strategies to demonstrate that the public interest is not served by the appellant's continued detention include emphasizing the appellant's strong ties to the community, their compliance with prior bail conditions, and the fact that they pose no risk to public safety. In conclusion, Section 679(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada provides a mechanism for an accused person to seek their release pending the outcome of their appeal. However, several strategic considerations need to be taken into account when making such an application. The strategic considerations outlined in this article emphasize the importance of demonstrating that the appeal is not frivolous, that the appellant will surrender themselves into custody in accordance with the terms of the order, and that their detention is not necessary in the public interest. By taking a strategic approach, the appellant can improve their chances of being released pending the determination of their appeal.