Top Stories -   

1

Top court: Prosecutors can renege on plea deals

A pedestrian is shown walking past the Supreme Court of Canada in Ottawa, Wednesday Feb. 23, 2011. (Adrian Wyld / THE CANADIAN PRESS)
A pedestrian is shown walking past the Supreme Court of Canada in Ottawa, Wednesday Feb. 23, 2011. (Adrian Wyld / THE CANADIAN PRESS)

View Larger Image

A A |  Email ThisEmail  | PrintComments (16) Facebook   

More on this topic

Date: Friday Jun. 24, 2011 10:02 AM ET

OTTAWA — The country's top court has declared that the Crown can renege on a plea bargain that would have allowed a woman to plead to careless driving in a deadly crash.

The Supreme Court of Canada was unanimous in its decision, the first time the justices have ruled on the discretion allowed prosecutors in plea agreements.

The Alberta case involved Olga Maria Nixon, who was charged with impaired driving causing death and injury in a 2006 crash which killed a couple and injured their seven-year-old son.

A prosecutor concluded there were problems with the admissibility of the breath samples and agreed to reduce the charges to dangerous driving causing death and injury.

Further negotiation led to a deal for a plea of careless driving, a traffic offence.

However, the attorney general's office determined that agreement was contrary to the administration of justice and withdrew it.

Nixon's lawyers then argued that the Crown's repudiation of the deal was a violation of her Charter rights. The trial judge agreed and ordered the Crown to proceed with the lesser charge.

The Alberta Court of Appeal disagreed, and the Supreme Court of Canada upheld its decision.

Comments are now closed for this story

jimmie t
said
0 0

This doesn't sound like a plea bargain to me. a plea bargain involves each side giving something up. This is a case of the original prosecutor not thinking they could get a conviction so they told this woman they were only going to charge her with the lesser crime. Then the prosecutors boss came back and said guess again.


Jamie D
said
0 0

This should bode well for Lawyers & Legal types that get paid by the hour.Problem is: Criminals plea bargain by agreeing to plead guilty on a lesser charge for a targeted sentence. So now Criminals are not going to plea bargain, and so are going to trial with all charges.I see clogged courts, clogged pretrial facilities, and lots of Not Guilty verdicts from juries, as crown prosecutors plea bargain when their case is iffy.This is new rule is not well thought out at all.Since the Civil arm is affected as well as Criminal and Civil are two peas on a pod. So does this mean when a person gets the other party to agree to an uncontested plea & recommended remuneration, that the offering party can renege on at the last minute?Hmmmmm...


cf
said
0 0

The government had nothing to do with it. The Court made the decision. And, one persons, plea bargain being an undesirable outcome is no reason for the Crown to become as untrustworthy as the criminals.


Paul ~ Kitchener
said
0 0

D.U.I. Killing = A sentence of 1st or 2nd degree Murder. Killing someone with any instrument under the influence of any drug is a Capital Crime.It matters not if one uses a firearm, axe, poison or a vehicle these are and can be instruments of "DEATH". Bleeding soft hearts, & tears, and I'm sorry, does nothing for the one killed. Until our courts start meeting out "Justice", & stop this terrible broken court process, we will continue to be a "Failure in the Legal World" !


Lance Usher
said
0 0

Too bad this decision was not made in the case of Carla Homolka, who withheld evidence... Her plea bargain should never have stood!


Jonathan from Saskatoon
said
0 0

That seems fair. Defendants can withdraw their plea at any time, right up until the judge slams the gavel. That said, any confession made as part of the plea deal would then have to be voided, as well as any evidence gathered as a result of said confession. Had the Crown the wherewithal to do this with Karla Homolka, she'd still be where she belongs for her part in raping and killing 13 and 14 year old girls.


A. Clausen
said
0 0

Dave in MB, I don't think it's that dangerous. In this case, so far as I can tell, it's clear the Attorney General, who sits at the top of the prosecutorial ladder, overrode the plea agreement of a Crown Prosecutor. What this was ultimately about was the AG's effective right to moderate the decisions of a prosecutor. To disallow the AG the ability to do that is to effectively suborn the general way in which our justice system functions.And anyone accused of a crime who is negotiating a plea agreement should be aware that even if the Crown cuts a deal, a judge is not bound by it anyways. If the Crown's plea agreement is to lenient in a judge's eyes, the judge is perfectly free to refuse to accept it.


Say What?
said
0 0

While I think it was disgusting that they offered her a deal in the first place on such a heinous act, I believe a deal is a deal. You cannot offer something and then not follow through. This is unethical, and makes those plying the legal trade just as untrustworthy as the scum they are prosecuting. That being said, can we use this precedent on Carla Hololka, and throw her back in jail to rot?


Prof. Pye Chartt
said
0 0

Good decision. The Attorney General is the top legal dog, and Crown prosecutors are merely authorized representatives. In this case, the original charge (which seemed appropriate when levied) was watered down to an "unacceptable" level, and deemed unjust by the Attorney General's office. This does NOT mean that the process of plea bargaining has been damaged; rather, it simply means that the Crown can rescind or unilaterally withdraw an unfit or unjust offer PRIOR to a judicial outcome. There's nothing "unfair" about that, given the pursuit of justice and the duty of the crown to represent both victim and the people. The defendant is provided ample opportunity to "defend" him/herself on the standing charge, and is subject to the ultimate decision of a jury or judge anyway.


Michael
said
0 0

As much as I think this person should get the death penallty a deal is a deal, they had a verbal or maybe written agreement if were going to reneg lets go get Holmolka!


Pip
said
0 0

Let's Negotiate paints a black picture - but not as bad a picture as criminals being able to "negotiate" a charge much lower on the scale. What this ruling WILL do is ensure that when a charge is laid, prosecution has enough evidence to gain a conviction. As for inadequate numbers of prosecutors and all the other things mentioned by Let's Negotiate, consider how our population has grown over the last few decades. The actual number of crimes has risen too, as has the number of successful prosecutions. But during that time, did the number of jail places or prosecutors rise in proportion? NO. Why? For most of the time, Liberal governments were in power. A Conservative government wants to build new prisons so that overcrowding is reduced or eliminated, and the left wing crowd complain - but they also complain because of overcrowding, but their solution is not to jail criminals. They can't have it both ways. If someone commits a crime and is sentenced to jail time, they should do it. As for plea bargaining - never should have started, in my opinion. This was a good decision by the SCC.


Sam C
said
0 0

There have been too may instances of "sweetheart deals" where wrist-slaps have been agreed upon in exchange for a plea, or in exchange for testimony against a partner in crime (Karla Homolka). Certainly there is pressure to get any conviction, but not at any price.


PUGFIRE
said
0 0

This is good news. There is way too much of this "lesser charge" stuff going on. Do the crime, do the time!!!I'd love to know where in the Charter of Rights it says that we are ENTITLED to receive charges of a lesser nature that that which we did....Let's clean up this farce we call a judicial system.


John Reid
said
0 0

As a DUI she should be charged with a minimum of first or second degree murder no one forced her to partake of any substance that impaired her judgement therefore it is a self inflicted impairement and would be the same as shooting a gun randomly into a groud and she should take full responsibility for her actions.


Dave in MB
said
0 0

I think this is a very dangerous, slippery slope to set a precedent like this. Some times the only way to settle a case, to get closure for a victim's family, is to "make a deal". This may very well end this practice if the criminals cannot trust the system.


Let's Negotiate
said
0 0

For all intents and purposes, this will negate plea bargaining and result in more trials for an already choked legal system. More trials will mean more legal staff. More trials will mean more incarceration. More incarceration will mean longer eligibility for parole. Longer eligibility will mean longer sentences,. Longer sentences will mean overcrowding. Overcrowding will mean more double bunking. More double bunking will mean more prisoner hostility. More hostility will mean more and bigger prisons. More and bigger prisons will mean more corrections staff. All of which will mean more money from the taxpayer and from existing programs say nothing of the human cost to those convicted waiting in remand, their families, those victimized and their families, all awaiting and end to their nightmare. More of this will lead to less happiness with government. Less happiness with government will bring about a change of government, the only good thing about it all!!!


Share with your social Network:

Facebook DIGG Newsvine Delicious Twitter StumbeUpon Reddit Yahoo! Buzz

 

Advertisement

Contest

Today's Top Stories

Labour Minister Lisa Raitt appears on CTV's Power Play on Monday, May 28, 2012.

Federal government orders end to CP Rail strike

More   51 Comments 51    12 Video(s) 12

Dominic and Abby Maryk were found in Mexico four years after allegedly being abducted by their father.

Extradition sought in Winnipeg missing children case

More   4 Comments 4    3 Video(s) 3

Protesters opposing Quebec student tuition fee hikes demonstrate in Montreal, Sunday, May 27, 2012. (Graham Hughes / THE CANADIAN PRESS)

Quebec, students resume talks on tuition hikes

More   26 Comments 26    1 Video(s) 1