section 723(3)


The court can request evidence for determining appropriate sentence.


723(3) The court may, on its own motion, after hearing argument from the prosecutor and the offender, require the production of evidence that would assist it in determining the appropriate sentence.


Section 723(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada gives the court the discretionary power to request additional evidence during a sentencing hearing. This means that the court can require the prosecutor and the offender to provide evidence that would help it determine the appropriate sentence for the offender. This section is a crucial component of the criminal justice system as it allows the court to have access to all relevant information that will help it arrive at a just and fair sentence. The provision is also beneficial to both the prosecution and the defense as it creates an opportunity for them to present additional evidence that may not have been presented during the trial. For instance, the prosecutor may introduce evidence of a previous criminal record of the offender, or the offender may present evidence of mitigating factors such as their socioeconomic or psychological disposition. This additional information helps the court to take into account all factors relevant to the case, thereby reducing the likelihood of a miscarriage of justice. Furthermore, the section emphasizes the independence of the judiciary by giving the court the power to request evidence on its own motion. This means that the court is not solely reliant on the parties to present all relevant evidence, but can take an active role in obtaining the necessary information. This ensures that the court is in a better position to make an informed decision on the appropriate sentence and uphold the principles of justice. Overall, section 723(3) is a crucial provision in ensuring that the sentencing process is fair, just, and effective. Its presence in the Criminal Code of Canada demonstrates the commitment of the Canadian legal system to upholding the fundamental principles of justice and fairness.


Section 723(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada is an important provision that authorizes a court to require the production of evidence that would assist it in determining the appropriate sentence. This provision gives the court the power to order the prosecutor or the offender to present any relevant evidence that may be helpful in making an informed decision about the appropriate punishment for the offender's crime. The Criminal Code of Canada is the main body of law that sets out the legal principles and procedures for criminal trials and sentencing in Canada. One of the key principles of Canadian criminal law is that the punishment should be proportionate to the seriousness of the crime and the degree of the offender's culpability. In other words, the sentence should reflect the gravity of the offence and the offender's level of responsibility for it. To achieve this objective, the court needs to consider a wide range of factors when determining the appropriate sentence. These factors may include the nature and severity of the crime, the offender's criminal record, the offender's personal and social circumstances, the impact of the crime on the victim and the community, and any mitigating or aggravating factors that may be relevant. Given the complexity and diversity of these factors, it is often difficult for the court to make an accurate and fair sentencing decision without the benefit of additional evidence. Section 723(3) helps to address this challenge by allowing the court to request the production of evidence that may assist it in reaching a just and appropriate sentence. This evidence may come from a variety of sources, such as victim impact statements, expert reports, character references, or other materials that shed light on the offender's history, background, and circumstances. In practice, the use of Section 723(3) may vary depending on the particular circumstances of each case. For example, in some cases, the prosecutor may present additional evidence during the sentencing hearing to argue for a harsher sentence, while in other cases, the offender may request that the court consider certain mitigating factors, such as mental illness or addiction, that were not previously disclosed in the trial. In either case, the court has the discretion to decide whether to admit the evidence and to what extent it should be taken into account when determining the sentence. Overall, Section 723(3) is an important tool that helps to ensure that the sentencing process is fair, transparent, and evidence-based. By allowing the court to consider a wider range of factors when deciding the appropriate punishment for a crime, this provision enhances the legitimacy and credibility of the criminal justice system and promotes respect for the rule of law.


Section 723(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada provides the court with the discretion to require the production of evidence that may assist in determining the appropriate sentence for an offender. This provision presents a unique opportunity for both the offender and the prosecutor to present evidence that might sway the court's decision towards a more favorable outcome. Strategic considerations that come into play when dealing with Section 723(3) include the specific circumstances of the case, the nature of the offense committed, the offender's criminal record, and the relationship between the offender and the victim. These all play a crucial role in determining the type of evidence or argument raised in court. One strategy that the defense counsel may consider is to present mitigating evidence. The court may consider any factor that reduces the moral blameworthiness of an offender, which may include things such as the offender's youth at the time of the offense, mental illness, or the fact that the offender is the sole caretaker of their family. In this case, the offender's counsel may seek to produce evidence that highlights how the offender is not completely culpable for the offense committed and as such, should receive a more lenient sentence. Another strategy that could be employed by the defense counsel would be to present compelling evidence that demonstrates any potential extenuating circumstances, which may have led to the commission of the offense. For instance, in a case of drug possession, the defense may argue that the offender was coerced into committing the crime by someone else or that they only did it because they were facing financial insecurity. The defense may also present evidence of past rehabilitation efforts and convince the court that the offender is less likely to reoffend if a lighter sentence is given. On the other hand, the prosecutor could argue for a harsher sentence by highlighting the heinous nature of the crime committed or the offender's prior criminal record. In cases of violent crimes, the prosecutor could present evidence of the harm caused to the victim, the extent of physical or emotional trauma, and demand a severe sentence based on community expectations. In these cases, the prosecutor would seek to present evidence that makes the offender more culpable and deserving of punishment. Finally, both the prosecutor and the defense could argue about the relevance and reliability of the evidence presented. Any evidence presented would have to meet certain thresholds of admissibility, and the court would consider the weight that it lends to the specifics at hand. The defense may argue that any evidence presented is weak, inconsistent, or irrelevant to the case. Conversely, the prosecutor could argue that the evidence is convincing and demands a harsh sentence. In conclusion, Section 723(3) provides an avenue for both the prosecutor and the offender to influence the court's decision. Strategic considerations would vary based on the specifics of each case but generally involve presenting compelling evidence that would sway the judge one way or the other. An effective argument would have to balance the various factors that the court considers when determining an appropriate sentence.