Sentences with phrase «proceed by indictment»

Since 2005, if the Crown elects to proceed by indictment, the maximum sentence is five years incarceration, increased from the previous maximum of two years.

The Crown elected to proceed by indictment.

Usually, the Crown Attorney will proceed by summary conviction for less serious offences, but they may choose to proceed by indictment after considering factors such as the seriousness of allegations or the accused's prior criminal record.

If the Crown chooses to proceed by indictment, the maximum penalty associated with a conviction is ten years imprisonment, with a minimum punishment of one year imprisonment if the victim is under the age of sixteen.

Should the Crown proceed by indictment, the maximum penalty the accused can receive is two years imprisonment for the first offence and five years» imprisonment for a second or subsequent offence.

Charges that proceed by indictment are more serious crimes that have higher jail sentences.

If the Crown elects to proceed by Indictment then the accused can choose (or elect) to have his trial heard by a Judge or by both a Judge and Jury in Supreme Court.

Justice Moldaver was of the view that the court should focus on the constitutionality of the Crown's election to proceed by indictment rather than summarily and not on the law itself, at para. 150:

RT @crimlacy: #ONCA Crown decision to proceed by Indictment vs. Summarily not open to challenge as abuse of process: https://t.co/ewMiTLbN…

However, there is a category of hybrid offences where, even when the Crown elects to proceed by indictment, the accused will have no choice as to mode of trial, but must be tried by a Provincial Court judge.

The Court also rejected the trial Judge's finding that the law was sound because the mandatory minimum sentence only applied where the Crown elected to proceed by indictment and that the «reasonable exercise of Crown discretion would result in summary proceedings».

Criminal harassment is punishable by up to ten years imprisonment when the Crown proceeds by indictment, whereas assault is punishable by up to five years when the Crown proceeds by indictment.

Section 264 (3) of the Criminal Code sets out that a conviction for criminal harassment can result in up to ten years imprisonment if the Crown proceeds by indictment.

The same penalties apply to Domestic Assault as to Assault; up to five years» imprisonment if the Crown proceeds by indictment, although they tend to fall further towards the strict end of the spectrum.

Section 151 of the Criminal Code sets out that a conviction for sexual interference can result in up to ten years imprisonment when the Crown proceeds by indictment.

If the Crown proceeds by indictment, the maximum sentence is 10 years imprisonment.

Section 267 of the Criminal Code sets out that a conviction of assault causing bodily harm can result in a penalty of up to ten years imprisonment when the Crown proceeds by indictment.

Section 264 of the Criminal Code sets out that a conviction of threatening death can result in a penalty of up to five years imprisonment when the Crown proceeds by indictment.

A «theft under» type shoplifting charge is punishable by up to 6 months in jail and / or a $ 2,000 fine if the Crown lawyer chooses to proceed summarily (a less serious offence) or up to 2 years in jail if the Crown lawyer proceeds by indictment (a more serious offence).

C.A.: s. 95 (2)(a)(ii) of the Criminal Code declared of no force and effect as contrary to s. 12 of the Charter to the extent that it imposes a mandatory five - year minimum term of imprisonment for a second or subsequent offence when Crown proceeds by indictment.

C.A.: s. 95 (2)(a)(i) of the Criminal Code declared of no force or effect as contrary to s. 12 of the Charter to the extent that it imposes a mandatory three - year minimum term of imprisonment when Crown proceeds by indictment.

And it was required, in cases where the grand jury in attendance upon any of these courts should terminate its session without proceeding by indictment or otherwise against any prisoner named in the list, that the judge of the court should forthwith make an order that such prisoner, desiring a discharge, should be brought before him or the court to be discharged, on entering into recognizance, if required, to keep the peace and for good behavior, or to appear, as the court might direct, to be further dealt with according to law.

Not exact matches

«In light of the on - going criminal proceeding by the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York against Dean Skelos and his son, Adam, we have no comment on the superseding indictment and continue to cooperate with this ongoing investigation.»

If you have been charged with a hybrid offence mitigating factors may influence the Crown's decision of whether or not to proceed by summarily or by indictment.

One of the most important factors when a sentence is being determined is whether the Crown decided to proceed summarily or by indictment.

For example, mitigating factors may mean the difference between the Crown proceeding summarily or by indictment.

Whether it is an individual involved in a simple business dispute, accident, domestic relations dispute, criminal proceeding, airplane crash, explosion, malpractice injury, a RICO indictment, injury by defective product or asbestos exposure; or a business organization faced with a multifaceted, multimillion dollar complex litigation problem, a control dispute, a grand jury investigation, a regulatory problem or an indictment; or a governmental unit facing financial default, the loss of a state - wide tax, prosecution or defense of a complex contract dispute or the need to use creative litigation to change a governmental structure — the individual, entrepreneur, corporation, private attorney, CEO, councilman, mayor, governor or even Presidential candidate has turned to the Climaco Firm to solve the problem.

Whether it is an individual involved in a simple business dispute, accident, domestic relations dispute, white collar criminal proceeding, airplane crash, explosion, malpractice injury, a RICO indictment, or injury by defective product; or a business organization faced with a multifaceted, multimillion dollar complex litigation problem, a control dispute, a grand jury investigation, a regulatory problem or an indictment; or a governmental unit facing financial default, the loss of a state - wide tax, prosecution or defense of a complex contract dispute or the need to use creative litigation to change a governmental structure — the individual, entrepreneur, corporation, private attorney, CEO, councilman, mayor, governor or even Presidential candidate has turned to the Climaco Firm to solve the problem.

If the Crown chooses to proceed be indictment, which is generally reserved for more serious cases, the maximum penalty that can be imposed by the court is ten years imprisonment.

Assault is a hybrid offence, meaning that the prosecutor can elect to proceed summarily or by indictment.

If the Crown indicates that the charges are serious enough then the Crown will proceed by what is called an «Indictment» instead of in the regular course (or by what is called by «Summary Conviction»).

The Prosecutor proceeded by way of Indictment.

It will also tell you if the Crown is proceeding by way of summary conviction or by indictment.

If charged with a section 271 sexual assault, the Crown will elect how they wish to proceed; either summarily or by indictment.

Many crimes are «dual procedure» meaning the Crown chooses whether it will proceed summarily or by indictment.

For these offences the Crown Attorney may choose either to proceed by summary conviction or indictment.

When the Crown proceeds on such a charge by indictment, there is a three year mandatory minimum sentence.

Nothing in KRS 432.230 to 432.270 shall prevent any court or judge from proceeding against any person writing or publishing a libel or slanderous words concerning such court or judge in relation to his judicial conduct in court by indictment, nor prevent any court from punishing any person guilty of a contempt in resisting or disobeying any judicial order or process issued by or under the authority of such court.»

Also, really absurdly nitpicky note: under the «Don't include irrelevant info» paragraph it looks like the «arraignments» was written (def: A criminal proceeding at which the defendant is officially called before a court of competent jurisdiction, informed of the offense charged in the complaint, information, indictment, or other charging document, and asked to enter a plea of guilty, not guilty, or as otherwise permitted by law.