Criminal Code of Canada - section 686(4)

section 686(4)

INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION

This section outlines the options available to the court of appeal in cases of acquittal or verdict of unfitness to stand trial or not criminally responsible, including the ability to dismiss the appeal or order a new trial or impose a guilty verdict and sentence.

SECTION WORDING

686(4) If an appeal is from an acquittal or verdict that the appellant or respondent was unfit to stand trial or not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder, the court of appeal may (a) dismiss the appeal; or (b) allow the appeal, set aside the verdict and (i) order a new trial, or (ii) except where the verdict is that of a court composed of a judge and jury, enter a verdict of guilty with respect to the offence of which, in its opinion, the accused should have been found guilty but for the error in law, and pass a sentence that is warranted in law, or remit the matter to the trial court and direct the trial court to impose a sentence that is warranted in law.

EXPLANATION

Section 686(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada outlines the powers of the court of appeal in regards to appeals from acquittals or verdicts where the individual was found unfit to stand trial or not criminally responsible on account of a mental disorder. The purpose of this section is to ensure that justice is served in cases where an individual may have been wrongly acquitted or where an error in law has been made. The court of appeal may dismiss the appeal or allow the appeal and set aside the verdict. If the appeal is allowed, the court may order a new trial or enter a verdict of guilty with respect to the offense of which, in its opinion, the accused should have been found guilty but for the error in law. In the latter case, the court may pass a sentence that is warranted in law, or remit the matter to the trial court and direct the trial court to impose a sentence that is warranted in law. This section is important because it ensures that individuals who may have been wrongly acquitted or found not criminally responsible due to a mental disorder are not able to evade justice. It also ensures that errors in law do not go unchecked, and that the court of appeal has the power to rectify any mistakes made at trial. Overall, section 686(4) serves a crucial role in maintaining the integrity of the criminal justice system in Canada. It ensures that justice is served in a fair and just manner, while also protecting the rights of individuals who may have been wrongly acquitted or found not criminally responsible.

COMMENTARY

Section 686(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada outlines the options available to a court of appeal in cases where the appeal is against an acquittal or a verdict that the appellant or respondent was not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder. This section provides the court with the authority to either dismiss the appeal, order a new trial, enter a verdict of guilty with respect to the offence of which the accused should have been found guilty but for the error in law, or remit the matter to the trial court with instructions to impose a sentence that is warranted in law. The first option available to the court of appeal is to dismiss the appeal. This would result in the original verdict or acquittal being upheld, and there would be no further action taken by the court. This is typically done when it is determined that there are no grounds for the appeal and that the lower court's decision was correct. The second option available to the court is to order a new trial. This may be ordered if there were errors in the original trial proceedings that would significantly impact the accused's right to a fair trial. It may also be ordered if new evidence has come to light that was not available during the original trial. The third option available to the court of appeal is to enter a verdict of guilty with respect to the offence of which, in its opinion, the accused should have been found guilty but for the error in law. This means that the accused will be found guilty of the offence in question, even though they were acquitted or found not guilty at the original trial. This option is only available if the verdict was not decided by a judge and jury. The fourth option available to the court of appeal is to remit the matter to the trial court and direct the trial court to impose a sentence that is warranted in law. This means that the case is sent back to the lower court, with instructions on what the sentence should be. This option may be used if the trial court did not impose a sentence that was warranted in law, or if the sentence was deemed too lenient. Overall, Section 686(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada provides the court of appeal with several options when deciding how to handle an appeal against an acquittal or a verdict that the appellant or respondent was not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder. These options allow for the court to ensure that justice is served and that the accused's rights are protected.

STRATEGY

Section 686(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada is a crucial provision that governs appeals from verdicts of acquittal or criminally not responsible due to mental disorder. When it comes to dealing with this section of the Criminal Code, there are several strategic considerations that one must keep in mind. Some of these strategic considerations are as follows: 1. Timing of Appeal: The timing of an appeal can have a significant impact on its success. In cases where the appellant or the respondent is found unfit to stand trial or not criminally responsible, a prompt appeal should be filed. Filing an appeal too late can result in a dismissal of appeal due to a loss of jurisdiction. 2. Grounds for Appeal: To succeed in an appeal, valid grounds for appeal must exist. The most common grounds for appeal under section 686(4) include errors in law, misapplication of the law, or miscarriage of justice. To develop a strong appeal, a thorough analysis of the case facts and law is necessary. 3. Preparing for the Appeal Hearing: Preparation plays a critical role in the success of an appeal. This includes a detailed review of the case file, transcripts, and evidence that were presented at trial. The appellant or respondent's legal team should identify key legal issues, potential arguments, and anticipated responses to counterarguments. 4. Structure of the Appeal: The structure of the appeal must be well-organized and persuasive. This includes a clear statement of the legal issue, outlining relevant legal principles, and making specific arguments on why the lower court decision was incorrect. An effective presentation of the appeal can significantly increase its chances of success. 5. Consideration of Appropriate Remedy: If the appeal is successful, determining the appropriate remedy may vary. This includes either ordering a new trial or entering a verdict of guilty. The appellant's or respondent's legal team should evaluate the available options and determine what remedy is in their best interest. In terms of strategies that could be employed when dealing with section 686(4) of the Criminal Code, there are several options. Some of the strategies that can be employed include: 1. Challenging the Evidence: An effective appeal strategy involves challenging the evidence presented at trial. This includes questioning the credibility of witnesses, identifying inconsistencies, or suggesting new evidence that was not previously introduced in the case. 2. Arguing on Legal Technicalities: Appeals based on technical legal arguments can be successful as well. For instance, if the lower court judge made an error of law or judicially misapplied the law, then this can be argued on appeal. 3. Arguing on Sentencing: In cases where the lower court judge has passed an incorrect sentence, an appeal can be successful if the sentencing argument is made persuasively. The defence lawyer should be prepared to articulate why the sentence is incorrect and what the appropriate sentence should be. 4. Seeking Expert Opinion: The use of an expert witness can significantly strengthen an appeal. Bringing in an expert to provide their opinion on the facts of the case or their views on medical or legal issues can lend credibility to an appeal. In conclusion, section 686(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada is a critical provision for appeals from verdicts of acquittal or mentally unfit verdicts. To succeed in an appeal, strategic considerations such as timing, grounds for appeal, preparation, structure, and appropriate remedies should be considered. The strategies that can be employed include challenging evidence, arguing on legal technicalities, appealing the sentencing, and seeking expert opinion. By employing effective strategies, a successful appeal can be launched.