“Summary” means in a quick and simple manner. Summary conviction offences are considered less serious than indictable offences because they are punishable by shorter prison sentences and smaller fees. The penalty for these offences is found in s.787(1) of the Criminal Code, which provides a maximum punishment of a $5,000 fine or a term of imprisonment of not more than two years less a day or both.
It is extremely important to read the Code in detail for each offence. For every offence, the Code has listed what the Crown has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. As with all offences, the Crown must prove both actus reus and mens rea of the offence beyond a reasonable doubt. That is, the act or the omission of the offence must be proven as well as the criminal intent. The accused must have had the mental capacity and the intent to commit the offence. The offence cannot have been the result of an accident. Therefore, the usual defence in criminal cases is a lack of intent. However, the intent may be satisfied by the intent to commit the act rather than by the intent to do something wrong.
What are the most common types of summary conviction offences?
Causing a Disturbance – conduct that disturbs public peace and order in or near a public place is an offence according to the Code. The conduct may be fighting, shouting, singing, using insulting or obscene language, loitering, being drunk, discharging firearms, or impending harassing or molesting other persons. To make out a case, the Crown must prove that the accused was not in a dwelling home and was engaging in one of the listed acts. The Crown also must prove that the accused was in or near a public place and someone was actually disturbed by the acts listed.
Trespassing at Night – Loitering or “prowling” on another person’s property without permission and without an excuse. Loitering means wandering with no precise definition and prowling includes a notion of evil. A prowler does not act causally, but with a purpose. In this case, the Crown does not need to prove that the accused intended to commit a specific evil act, but only that the accused person was loitering and prowling intentionally on another person’s property without an excuse. This offence is charged along with another offence, such as theft under $5,000 or possession of a break-in instrument. For example, a person might be charged with trespassing at night when the person entered a vehicle in a driveway to steal property from the vehicle.
Taking a Motor Vehicle Without Consent – “Joy riding” is the common term for this offence. This requires that the motor vehicle be taken without the owner’s consent. A person can be charged with this offence even if they are just a passenger in the vehicle that has been taken without consent. Possessing a stolen vehicle is an offence regardless of whether a person stole it or not. It is assumed that if a person has possession of a stolen vehicle, that it is the person themselves who stole the vehicle. The only defence available in a scenario where someone has possession of a stolen vehicle is that they had no idea that the vehicle was stolen.
Fraudulently obtaining food, beverage or accommodation – s. 364(1) of the Code states that every one who fraudulently obtains food, a beverage or accommodation at any place that is in the business of providing those things is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction. A common example of this is, not paying a restaurant bill. For this offence, the Crown must prove that the person intended not to pay for food, beverage or accommodation stolen.
Transportation Fraud – it is a criminal offence to obtain transportation in a fraudulent way. This means that any free or discounted ride obtained by intentional deceit or falsehood can lead to these charges. This offence carries a penalty of up to six months in jail and a criminal record. An example of this offence includes not paying for public transportation, such as TTC or Go Transit. However, the fraud must be intentional. A mistake can be forgiven by the court unless the person intended not to pay.
Attempts and Accessories After the Fact, Summary Conviction – anyone who attempts to commit a summary conviction offence or is an accessory after the fact to such an offence is also guilty of a summary conviction offence. An accessory after the fact is defined in s.23(1) as one who, knowing that a person has been a party to the offence, receives, comforts or assists that person for the purpose of enabling them to escape. A common example of this would be helping someone to hide to get away after they have robbed a bank or stolen a vehicle.
When charged with a summary conviction offence, it is best to reach out to a criminal lawyer or a paralegal who has experience in the field. Every situation has different circumstances. It is ideal to get help from someone who is experienced rather than defending one’s self alone. Sometimes, a mistake or an unfortunate situation can lead to these charges where there was no intent. A legal representative would be able to defend a person in those circumstances, so that the person’s record does not get tainted because of a mistake or an act they did not commit.
