INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION
If a count charges murder but evidence proves manslaughter or infanticide, the jury may find accused guilty of lesser charge, but not any other offence.
SECTION WORDING
662(3) Subject to subsection (4), where a count charges murder and the evidence proves manslaughter or infanticide but does not prove murder, the jury may find the accused not guilty of murder but guilty of manslaughter or infanticide, but shall not on that count find the accused guilty of any other offence.
EXPLANATION
Section 662(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada is a provision that applies to cases where an accused is charged with murder, but the evidence presented in court proves that the accused is guilty of a lesser offense, such as manslaughter or infanticide. In such cases, the jury has the discretion to acquit the accused of the murder charge but find them guilty of manslaughter or infanticide. The provision underscores the importance of ensuring that the verdict in a criminal trial corresponds to the facts established in court. It recognizes that while an accused may have committed a crime, the nature and extent of that crime may be different from what was initially charged. The provision ensures that the accused is not convicted of a crime that they did not commit. Moreover, this section reflects the principle of proportionality in criminal sentencing. Murder is the most serious crime in the Criminal Code of Canada, and carries a mandatory sentence of life imprisonment. On the other hand, manslaughter and infanticide are less severe offenses and carry lighter sentences. The provision ensures that the punishment imposed on the accused accurately reflects the seriousness of the crime they committed. In summary, section 662(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada is a vital provision that promotes accuracy in criminal trials. It ensures that the jury has the discretion to deliver a verdict that aligns with the evidence presented in court. It also reinforces the principle of proportionality in criminal sentencing and ensures that the punishment imposed on the accused is fair and just.
COMMENTARY
Section 662(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada is a provision that lays out the rules governing the finding of guilt in cases of murder, manslaughter, and infanticide. According to this section, if a count charges a person with murder, but the evidence only proves manslaughter or infanticide, then the jury has the authority to find the accused guilty of either of these lesser offenses. However, the jury cannot find the accused guilty of any other offense. This provision is significant because it highlights the importance of evidence in criminal trials. It acknowledges that the verdict in a criminal case must be based on the evidence presented, and not on the severity of the charge alone. The provision also recognizes the fact that manslaughter and infanticide are lesser offenses than murder, and allows the jury some leeway in their decision-making process. The provision also has important implications for sentencing. If a person is found guilty of manslaughter or infanticide, their sentence will be less severe than if they were found guilty of murder. This is because murder is considered one of the most serious crimes, and carries with it a mandatory life sentence with a minimum period of parole ineligibility. In contrast, manslaughters and infanticides carry less severe sentences and allow more discretion in the sentencing process. However, it is important to note that section 662(3) does not give the jury free reign to find the accused guilty of either manslaughter or infanticide. The provision specifies that the evidence must prove these offenses, and that the jury cannot find the accused guilty of any other offenses. This means that the jury must carefully consider the evidence before making their decision, and must ensure that their verdict is supported by the evidence presented. Overall, section 662(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada is an important provision that serves to ensure that criminal trials are based on evidence, and that the verdict is appropriate to the crime committed. It recognizes that lesser offenses exist, and provides the jury with some discretion in their decision-making process. However, it also emphasizes the importance of evidence in the criminal justice system, and makes it clear that a guilty verdict must be supported by the evidence presented.
STRATEGY
When dealing with section 662(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada, there are several strategic considerations that must be taken into account. These considerations involve the interpretation of the law, the weighing of evidence, and the overall goal of the legal team. In this essay, we will discuss some of these strategic considerations and the strategies that could be employed by a legal team when dealing with this provision. The first consideration when dealing with section 662(3) is the interpretation of the law. It is essential to understand the exact requirements of the provision and the different possible outcomes of a trial. Section 662(3) states that if a count charges murder, but the evidence proves manslaughter or infanticide but not murder, the jury may find the accused not guilty of murder but guilty of manslaughter or infanticide. It also stipulates that the jury cannot find the accused guilty of any other offense. This means that the legal team must ensure that the evidence presented in court is sufficient to meet the legal requirements of the provision. One strategy that could be employed by the legal team is to carefully analyze the evidence and determine the possible outcomes of the trial. The legal team should consider all possible defenses available to the accused and work to undermine the prosecution's case. They should also consider the different elements required to prove manslaughter or infanticide and analyze how the evidence fits into these requirements. By doing so, the legal team can identify any weaknesses in the prosecution's case and build a stronger defense for their client. Another strategy that could be employed by the legal team is to negotiate with the prosecution to secure a plea bargain. This approach involves negotiating with the prosecution to reduce the charge from murder to manslaughter or infanticide before the trial begins. This strategy can be beneficial for both the accused and the prosecution as it can save time and resources. For the accused, accepting a plea bargain can result in a lighter sentence than if they were convicted of murder. For the prosecution, securing a conviction for manslaughter or infanticide can result in a successful prosecution without the need for a lengthy trial. A third strategy that could be employed by the legal team is to prepare a strong closing argument that emphasizes the elements required to prove manslaughter or infanticide. This approach involves presenting cogent arguments that illustrate how the evidence fits into the legal requirements of the provision. The legal team can also present evidence and expert testimony to support their arguments and strengthen their case. In conclusion, when dealing with section 662(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada, legal teams need to carefully analyze the evidence and determine the possible outcomes of the trial. They should also consider negotiating plea bargains and prepare a strong closing argument to secure a conviction. By utilizing these strategies, legal teams can strengthen their defense and secure a favorable outcome for their clients.