INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION
An accused persons recognizance continues to bind them and their sureties for their appearance until they are discharged or sentenced.
SECTION WORDING
764(1) Where an accused is bound by recognizance to appear for trial, his arraignment or conviction does not discharge the recognizance, but it continues to bind him and his sureties, if any, for his appearance until he is discharged or sentenced, as the case may be.
EXPLANATION
Section 764(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada is a provision that deals with the status of an accused person who has been released on recognizance pending trial. Recognizance, in this context, refers to a promise made by an accused person to appear in court on a specified date in exchange for being released from custody. The provision states that the accused person remains bound by their recognizance even after their arraignment or conviction. Their recognizance continues to be in effect until they are sentenced or otherwise discharged from their obligation to appear in court. This means that failure to appear in court as required by the recognizance can result in criminal charges and possible imprisonment or fines. Section 764(1) also states that the sureties who guaranteed the accused person's appearance are also bound by the same terms of the recognizance until the accused is discharged or sentenced. A surety is a person who agrees to take responsibility for the accused person's actions and ensure that they appear in court as required by the recognizance. This provision serves as a reminder to accused persons and their sureties that release on recognizance is a serious matter that requires compliance with all court orders and appearances. It also helps to maintain the integrity of the justice system by ensuring that accused persons appear in court as required and do not abuse the privilege of being released from custody. Overall, Section 764(1) contributes to the fair and effective administration of justice in Canada.
COMMENTARY
Section 764(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada is a provision that requires an accused person to continue to be bound by their recognizance even after their arraignment or conviction until they are discharged or sentenced. Essentially, this means that if an accused person has been released from custody on bail before their trial, they are still required to appear in court until their case has been fully adjudicated, even if they have already been arraigned or convicted. This provision is important for a number of reasons. Firstly, it ensures that the accused person remains available to the court throughout the trial process. If an accused person were to be released from their recognizance after their arraignment or conviction, they could potentially avoid further court appearances, which could make it more difficult for the court to administer justice. Secondly, the provision serves as a deterrent against bouncing on bail. If an accused person were allowed to be released from their recognizance after their arraignment or conviction, it would create a perverse incentive for them to do so. They would receive the benefits of being released on bail without any of the obligations associated with it, which could lead to increased instances of flight risk. Thirdly, the provision helps to ensure that the accused person's sureties are aware of their responsibilities under the recognizance. The recognizance is a binding legal agreement between the accused person and their sureties, which means that the sureties are responsible for ensuring that the accused person appears in court as required. If the recognizance were to be discharged after the accused person's arraignment or conviction, it would potentially absolve the sureties of their obligations, which could lead to confusion or misunderstanding about what is required of them. Overall, Section 764(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada is an important provision that helps to ensure the integrity of the bail system. It requires accused persons to remain available to the court throughout their trial process, serves as a deterrent against bouncing on bail, and ensures that sureties are aware of their responsibilities to the accused person and the court. By keeping accused persons bound by their recognizance until their case is fully adjudicated, this provision helps to maintain the trust and confidence of the public in the administration of justice.
STRATEGY
Section 764(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada imposes a legal obligation on an accused to appear for trial, and this obligation is enforced through the use of recognizances. Recognizances are legal agreements entered into by an accused and their sureties that require them to pay a fixed sum of money in the event that the accused breaches their obligation to appear for trial. This section has significant strategic implications for both accused individuals and prosecutors in the Canadian criminal justice system. One strategy that an accused may employ to deal with section 764(1) is to seek a discharge of their recognizance. An accused may seek a discharge of their recognizance by providing the court with evidence that they have met their obligation to appear for trial. For example, an accused may provide the court with evidence that they voluntarily attended all of their court appearances and that they were not required to be arrested or reprimanded for failing to appear. In cases where an accused provides sufficient evidence to the court, the court may discharge the recognizance. Alternatively, an accused may choose to remain bound by their recognizance while awaiting trial. In such a case, the accused must ensure that they remain in compliance with the terms of their recognizance. Failure to comply with a recognizance can lead to serious consequences, including criminal charges, fines, and possible imprisonment. Prosecutors, on the other hand, may use recognizances strategically in their prosecutorial decision-making. Recognizances can be used as a tool to ensure that accused individuals appear for trial, thereby increasing the chances of achieving a successful prosecution. Recognizances can also be used to impose conditions on accused individuals, such as restrictions on their ability to travel or possess firearms. By using recognizances in this way, prosecutors can help to ensure public safety and prevent potential crimes from occurring. Prosecutors may also consider the option of seeking to revoke an accused's recognizance. This option is particularly relevant in cases where an accused has breached their recognizance by failing to appear for trial or by engaging in other prohibited activities. By seeking to revoke an accused's recognizance, prosecutors can increase the chances of having the accused detained until trial, thereby mitigating the risks of flight or the commission of future crimes. In conclusion, section 764(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada imposes a legal obligation on accused individuals to appear for trial and uses recognizances as a means of enforcing this obligation. Both accused individuals and prosecutors can employ a range of strategic considerations when dealing with this section of the Criminal Code. These considerations may include seeking a discharge of a recognizance, remaining in compliance with the terms of a recognizance, and using recognizances as a tool to ensure public safety and achieve a successful prosecution. By understanding the implications of section 764(1) and using strategic considerations appropriately, accused individuals and prosecutors can navigate the Canadian criminal justice system effectively.