|
Statutory Interpretation - "Conviction". R. v. Wolfe
In R. v. Wolfe (SCC, 2024) the Supreme Court of Canada allowed a criminal appeal, here where the issue was 'discretionary driving prohibitions' added onto sentencing for convictions for certain CCC offences. This case corrected statutory interpretation confusion that had arisen over the years regarding 'which' convictions this system applied to.
Here the court contrasts the meanings of the terms 'guilt' and 'conviction' in a CCC context:[43] Findings of guilt and convictions are conceptually distinct in the criminal trial context. A finding of guilt is a verdict of the court following trial. It occurs when there has been a finding that the essential elements of the offence have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt (see Quigley’s Criminal Procedure in Canada (loose-leaf), by D. Rose, ed., at § 22:7; Boily, at para. 55; see also, regarding the related concept of a plea of guilt, Criminal Code, s. 606(1.1)(b); Ontario Courtroom Procedure (5th ed. 2020), by M. Fuerst, M. A. Sanderson and S. Firestone, eds., with the assistance of R. N. Beaudoin et al., at p. 586). A conviction, on the other hand, is “a final judgment of the court by which a finding of guilt is entered” (R. v. Bérubé, 2012 BCCA 345, 326 B.C.A.C. 241, at paras. 44 and 49; see also Boily, at para. 55; R. v. Senior (1996), 1996 ABCA 71 (CanLII), 181 A.R. 1 (C.A.), at para. 19). There is some authority to the effect that the meaning of the term “conviction” can vary based on the context (see Morris v. The Queen, 1978 CanLII 168 (SCC), [1979] 1 S.C.R. 405, at p. 429; R. v. McInnis (1973), 1973 CanLII 545 (ON CA), 1 O.R. (2d) 1 (C.A.)). There is no doubt, however, that a finding of guilt is a distinct and earlier step in the trial process than the recording of a conviction (see R. E. Salhany, Canadian Criminal Procedure (6th ed. (loose-leaf)), at § 6:88; Fuerst, Sanderson and Firestone, at p. 586). Section 570 of the Criminal Code describes the process by which a trial for an indictable offence concludes and the judgment of the court is recorded:570 (1) If an accused who is tried under this Part is determined by a judge or provincial court judge to be guilty of an offence on acceptance of a plea of guilty or on a finding of guilt, the judge or provincial court judge, as the case may be, shall endorse the information accordingly and shall sentence the accused or otherwise deal with the accused in the manner authorized by law and, on request by the accused, the prosecutor, a peace officer or any other person, a conviction in Form 35 and a certified copy of it, or an order in Form 36 and a certified copy of it, shall be drawn up and the certified copy shall be delivered to the person making the request. [44] A finding of guilt can lead to several different outcomes, including a conviction and the passing of sentence. Some issues that arise in criminal trials — such as whether to stay proceedings based on the entrapment defence or the rule against multiple convictions — are considered by the trial judge after a finding of guilt has been made but before a conviction is recorded (see R. v. Mack, 1988 CanLII 24 (SCC), [1988] 2 S.C.R. 903, at p. 972; R. v. Pearson, 1998 CanLII 776 (SCC), [1998] 3 S.C.R. 620, at paras. 10, 13 and 16; Kienapple v. The Queen, 1974 CanLII 14 (SCC), [1975] 1 S.C.R. 729; R. v. Provo, 1989 CanLII 71 (SCC), [1989] 2 S.C.R. 3; see also Salhany, at § 6:88). Courts must, “as soon as practicable after an offender has been found guilty, conduct proceedings to determine the appropriate sentence to be imposed” (s. 720(1)). For some offences, where an accused “pleads guilty . . . or is found guilty”, the court may direct that the accused be absolutely or conditionally discharged “instead of convicting the accused” (s. 730(1)).
[45] In short, a finding of guilt is not synonymous with a conviction. Indeed, the former is a precondition to the latter.
....
[56] In my view, the use of the wording “found guilty” in s. 320.24(4) is suggestive of an express judicial determination, whether by a jury in announcing its verdict or a judge. McGuinness defines a “finding” as a “determination made by an adjudicator during the course of a proceeding on some question of fact” (K. P. McGuinness, The Encyclopedic Dictionary of Canadian Law (2021)). Black’s Law Dictionary (11th ed. 2019) defines to “find” as “[t]o determine a fact in dispute by verdict or decision” and offers the phrase “find guilty” as an illustration. I agree with Skolrood J.A. that the natural and ordinary meaning conveyed by “found guilty” is that there has been a specific finding of guilt (Francisco, at para. 42). Given the usual function of included offences that I have described above, I cannot accept that a finding of guilt within the meaning of s. 320.24(4) can be the implied result of some other judicial determination (i.e., a conviction for an offence not enumerated in s. 320.24(4)).
|
