INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION
This section provides an exception for occupants of a stolen vehicle who attempt to leave or actually leave the vehicle upon realizing that it was taken without the owners consent.
SECTION WORDING
335(1.1) Subsection (1) does not apply to an occupant of a motor vehicle or vessel who, on becoming aware that it was taken without the consent of the owner, attempted to leave the motor vehicle or vessel, to the extent that it was feasible to do so, or actually left the motor vehicle or vessel.
EXPLANATION
Section 335(1.1) of the Criminal Code of Canada provides an exemption to occupants of stolen motor vehicles or vessels who attempt to or successfully leave the vehicle/vessel upon becoming aware that it was taken without the owner's consent. The previous subsection, 335(1), outlines the offence of taking a vehicle or vessel without the owner's permission, punishable by imprisonment up to 10 years. The purpose of subsection (1.1) is to exclude individuals who are not complicit in the theft of the vehicle/vessel but are simply passengers or occupants at the time of the offense. It acknowledges that passengers may find themselves in a dangerous and unexpected situation and may not have the ability or opportunity to prevent or stop the theft. This provision represents a crucial aspect of criminal law, namely that punishment should be proportionate to the level of culpability. Occupants who attempt to or successfully leave a stolen vehicle/vessel should not be held liable as harshly as those who intentionally and unlawfully take a vehicle/vessel without the owner's consent. This exemption balances the need for punishment for criminal acts with the recognition that not all occupants may be aware of the illegal activity occurring around them. Overall, Section 335(1.1) is an important tool for ensuring fairness and justice in the Canadian legal system. It recognizes that not all individuals involved in the theft of a vehicle/vessel are equally culpable and offers an alternative, less severe punishment for those who find themselves unwittingly caught up in these situations.
COMMENTARY
Section 335(1.1) of the Criminal Code of Canada provides an exemption to a person who is an occupant of a motor vehicle or vessel that has been taken without the owner's consent. This provision is aimed at protecting innocent individuals who may have been unknowingly and involuntarily involved in the theft of a vehicle or vessel. In Canada, theft of a motor vehicle or vessel is considered a serious crime that can result in imprisonment. Section 335(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada sets out the offence of theft of a motor vehicle or vessel, which applies to anyone who takes or drives away a motor vehicle or vessel without the owner's consent. However, section 335(1.1) provides an exception to this rule for occupants of these vehicles or vessels. According to section 335(1.1), an occupant of a motor vehicle or vessel who becomes aware that it was taken without the owner's consent must attempt to leave the vehicle or vessel to the extent that it is feasible to do so. Alternatively, they may actually leave the vehicle or vessel. By doing so, they may avoid being charged with theft or with being an accessory to the theft. The section provides exemption for those who did not consent to or authorized the taking of the vehicle or vessel. The provision helps to prevent individuals who may be wrongfully accused of participating in the theft of a motor vehicle or vessel. The provision is useful as it ensures that individuals who are unaware that the vehicle or vessel is stolen are not charged with theft. It also suggests that the law recognizes that occupants of a vehicle or vessel may not always be in control of the situation and may not be responsible for the theft. Persons who unwittingly found themselves in the car or affixed onto the vessel leaving a location, could exit the scene once they are aware of the theft and thus avoid an accusation of complicity. The aim of this section is to provide a degree of protection for innocent bystanders, such as passengers in cars or individuals on a boat, who might have been caught up in a situation where the vehicle or vessel was taken without their knowledge or consent. It also encourages occupants of stolen vehicles or vessels to distance themselves from the criminal activity that may be taking place. It should be noted that while section 335(1.1) provides an exemption to the individual, it does not prevent anyone else from being charged with the theft of the vehicle or vessel. The only way to avoid legal consequences if you become aware that a vehicle or vessel has been taken without the owner's consent is to attempt to leave the vehicle or vessel to the extent that it is feasible as per the section. In conclusion, section 335(1.1) of the Criminal Code of Canada provides an exception to the offence of theft of a motor vehicle or vessel. It aims to offer protection to innocent individuals who might have found themselves in a stolen vehicle or vessel without their consent. The section signals that the law recognizes the possibility of occupants of a vehicle or vessel involuntarily getting involved in a crime, and provides an opportunity for individuals to distance themselves legally should they find themselves in such a situation.
STRATEGY
Section 335(1.1) of the Criminal Code of Canada offers protection to occupants of a motor vehicle or vessel who find themselves in a situation where the vehicle or vessel is taken without the consent of the owner. This provision essentially means that if one realizes that the car or boat they are in has been stolen and makes an effort to leave it, to the extent that it was feasible to do so, they cannot be charged with a criminal offence. The application of this section presents several strategic considerations in cases involving stolen vehicles. One of the key considerations is determining whether the occupant was aware of the theft. If it can be shown beyond reasonable doubt that the occupant knew or ought to have known that the vehicle or vessel was stolen, then they may still be charged with a criminal offence notwithstanding the provisions of Section 335(1.1). Another strategic consideration is the timing of the occupant's attempt to leave the vehicle or vessel. The law requires that the occupant must attempt to leave the vehicle or vessel as soon as they become aware that it was taken without consent. It follows, therefore, that the longer the occupant remains in the vehicle or vessel, the more difficult it becomes to invoke the protection offered by Section 335(1.1). The prosecution may argue that the occupant had ample opportunity to leave but failed to do so, suggesting that they were possibly an accomplice in the theft or had some other motive for remaining in the vehicle or vessel. A further strategic consideration is the feasibility of leaving the vehicle or vessel. The law requires that the occupant must make an attempt to leave to the extent that it was feasible to do so. If it can be shown that the occupant did not make a feasible attempt but instead chose to remain in the vehicle or vessel, they may still be charged with a criminal offence. Given these strategic considerations, several strategies can be employed when dealing with Section 335(1.1) of the Criminal Code of Canada. For instance, defence counsel could argue that the occupant was genuinely unaware of the theft and therefore had no reason to suspect that they were in a stolen vehicle or vessel. Alternatively, counsel could argue that the occupant did make a feasible attempt to leave the vehicle or vessel as soon as they became aware of the theft, but that their efforts were thwarted by external factors. Another strategy that could be employed is to call on witnesses who can attest to the occupant's state of mind or actions. Such witnesses could also be used to demonstrate that the occupant had no motive to be involved in the theft and that their sole concern was their safety. In conclusion, Section 335(1.1) of the Criminal Code of Canada offers protection to occupants of stolen vehicles or vessels who make an attempt to leave when they become aware of the theft. When dealing with this provision, strategic considerations such as the occupant's state of mind, timing of their attempt to leave, and feasibility of leaving must be taken into account. Based on these considerations, several strategies can be employed, including demonstrating the occupant's lack of knowledge of the theft, showing that they made a feasible attempt to leave, or calling on witnesses to support their case.