vendredi 6 décembre 2013

Un plaidoyer de culpabilité équivaut à une reconnaissance des faits

R. v. C. (W. B.), 2000 CanLII 5659 (ON CA)

Lien vers la décision

[52] When a plea of guilty is entered, the judge has a duty to satisfy himself that the plea is supported by the 
facts: R. v. Lucas, supra.  This can be done in an informal manner through statements read into the record by Crown counsel.  Provided the statement as read in is not disputed, it will form the evidentiary foundation for the passing of sentence.  An allegation read into the record that  is not admitted by the defence is not 
evidence:  Report of the Attorney General’s  Advisory Committee on Charge Screening, Disclosure and 
Resolution Discussions, The Hon. G. Arthur Martin, Chair, Queen’s Printer for Ontario 1993 at 324-5.  
Where the alleged facts are disputed, they must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt in the traditional 
manner: Gardiner v. R. 1982 CanLII 30 (SCC), (1982), 68 C.C.C. (2d) 477.  After the statement has been read in, if the accused disputes any of  the aggravating facts the Crown must prove the alleged facts beyond a reasonable doubt.  Before passing sentence, the judge must be satisfied that the facts underpinning the plea 
sustain the charge: Adgey, supra, at 185-186.

Aucun commentaire:

Publier un commentaire