When an adolescent is charged with a criminal offence, his appearance before a Youth Court judge is his first contact with the main actors in the judicial system. The following people are present in the courtroom: his lawyer, the Attorney General’s prosecutor (also called the Crown prosecutor, the prosecution, or simply the prosecutor), the Court staff and, of course, the judge. The public is also allowed inside the room. The judge first makes sure that the adolescent’s parents were notified of the appearance, as required by the Act.

Next, the judge reads the charge and informs the adolescent of his right to a lawyer, if he doesn’t already have one. In most cases, the adolescent pleads not guilty. This gives his lawyer the time to get to know the facts, so that he can defend him properly. The file is then put off to a later date. However, if the adolescent pleads guilty, he is declared guilty once the judge is convinced that the charge is supported by the facts.

Appearing while still in custody

In most cases, the accused adolescent is released after his arrest, but then receives an order to appear in court (a promise to appear, appearance notice, or summons).This order must be respected and followed.

However, in cases involving a serious offence or when his court record justifies it, the adolescent may be kept in detention by the police until he appears before the court. The authorities must have the detained adolescent appear before a judge within twenty-four hours of the arrest.

On the appearance date, the Attorney General’s prosecutor takes a position. He may agree that the adolescent should be released, subject to certain restrictions and conditions. If, on the other hand, he opposes the release, the adolescent stays in custody until the interim release hearing (bail hearing). If the judge refuses to release the adolescent, he remains in custody until the end of the proceedings.

This hearing allows the court to decide if the adolescent accused of committing a crime must be detained during the proceedings, or if he can be set free subject to certain conditions.

Crown privilege

If an adolescent remains in custody at the time of his appearance, the prosecutor may oppose his interim release (his release before the trial).

The debate on this question takes place before the judge and is called the judicial interim release hearing or bail hearing. This hearing must take place within three days of the accused’s appearance, since he is held in custody while waiting for the release hearing.

How the hearing unfolds

As a general rule, the Attorney General’s prosecutor has the investigating police officer testify before the court. The prosecutor tries to use this testimony to show that releasing the accused would endanger public security or that detention is necessary to ensure that the adolescent shows up for the rest of the proceedings.

The Court’s decision

After hearing the parties, if the judge is convinced by the prosecution’s arguments, he orders the detention of the accused until the end of the proceedings.

Otherwise, the court orders the release of the adolescent. The adolescent must then sign a promise to respect certain conditions until the trial. These conditions might include a curfew, a prohibition on owning weapons, or a prohibition on contacting the victim or witnesses.

This step of the legal process is where the Crown informs the defence of the evidence that he has against the accused. At this stage, negotiations will often begin between the Crown prosecutor and the defence lawyer to attempt to settle the case.

Disclosure

When an adolescent is first charged, his lawyer won’t have very much information about the evidence that the police have collected against him.

The prosecutor must provide the defence with copies of the written statements made by each witness interviewed by the police, as well as a copy of the investigation report. This step is called “disclosure” and takes place during the “pro forma” proceedings.

Negotiation

After becoming familiar with the strengths and weaknesses of the evidence, the defence and prosecution may want to try to negotiate a settlement of the case. By negotiating, the parties might be able to avoid the excessive costs of a trial.

When they return before the judge, the parties are ready to submit their settlement and they often propose solutions that both sides find acceptable. If the negotiations fail, the parties ask the judge to set a trial date.

The general principle

The preliminary inquiry is part of criminal court procedure. It is only used in the more serious youth cases. The preliminary inquiry is heard by a judge before the trial at the request of either the prosecution or the accused. At the preliminary inquiry, the judge does not determine the guilt or innocence of the accused. Nor does he consider the quality of the evidence at this stage. Instead, the goal is simply to determine whether evidence exists in the first place. The preliminary inquiry makes it possible to avoid having a trial where there is absolutely no evidence on at least one essential element of the offence charged.

How the preliminary inquiry unfolds

During the preliminary inquiry, the prosecutor presents the elements needed to prove the offence, using witness testimony, documents and other evidence. At this point, not all of the evidence needs to be presented. In fact, the party who asks for a preliminary inquiry must tell the court which specific topics should be dealt with, and which witnesses or evidence the party wants to examine.

The advantages

The preliminary inquiry is a useful time for the defence to evaluate and learn more about the available evidence — without risking a conviction. In this process the accused can ask witnesses to clearly explain their version of the facts. The defence can ask multiple questions of the witnesses without necessarily truly confronting them. This makes it possible to measure how believable each witness is, and to prepare the ground for the next phase: the trial.

This is a hearing where the Crown tries to prove the guilt of the adolescent beyond a reasonable doubt. The trial ends with the lawyers’ arguments, where they explain their respective positions to the judge.

The burden of proof

In any criminal trial, even a youth trial, it’s up to the prosecutor to show the court that the accused committed the offence alleged against her. This has to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, which means that the judge must not have any doubt that the accused really did commit the crimes at issue. This is a long-standing rule in Canadian criminal law, and it is based on the principle that an accused person is presumed innocent until proven guilty.

The witnesses’ testimony

Since it is up to the prosecutor to prove the accused person guilty, the prosecution has to present his witnesses first. With the help of eyewitnesses, police and experts, the prosecutor tries to show that the adolescent committed the offence as charged.

For his part, the defence lawyer challenges the believability of the Crown’s witnesses by asking very precise questions. This is called “cross-examination.” The defence lawyer can also ask his own witnesses to testify — even the accused can choose to testify, or not. The defence witnesses are also cross-examined, but by the prosecutor.

Argument

When each side has finished presenting its evidence and all the witnesses have been heard by the court, each lawyer is allowed to explain his arguments to the judge. These are supposed to be based on the evidence the court heard, as well as the current criminal law on the subject.

This final step concludes the trial and helps the judge to decide whether to declare the accused guilty or innocent.

After the trial or a guilty plea, the judge must decide whether or not the adolescent is guilty of committing the offences alleged against her. His decision on this question is called the verdict.

The role of the judge

During a trial, the role of the judge is basically to listen carefully to the evidence and the lawyers’ arguments. Afterwards, taking all of this into account, he must decide whether the accused is criminally responsible for the offence she has been charged with. This decision constitutes the “verdict” (not to be confused with the “sentence,” which is explained later).

The basis of the verdict

Beyond his personal opinions of the case, the judge has to base his verdict on the evidence shown during the trial, and on the rules of Canadian criminal law. After an in-depth look at the evidence, if the judge thinks that the accused managed to raise a reasonable doubt in his mind about her guilt, he must acquit her. However, if the prosecution has been able to prove the accused’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, the court will declare a guilty verdict.

This is a measure imposed by a judge on an adolescent after there has been a guilty verdict.

Legal principles

When a Youth Court finds an adolescent guilty of an offence, it has to impose one or several measures as a consequence of the person’s act.

In adult court this would generally mean a regular sentence, but in Youth Court a special “youth sentence” is imposed. This takes the form of a court order that the adolescent must respect, if she doesn’t want to risk the possibility of other charges being brought against her.

Youth sentences differ from adult sentences. However, in serious criminal cases like murder, the youth court can give the adolescent an adult sentence. The court can only do this if there is no youth sentence which would be appropriate, given the seriousness of the adolescent’s crime. Even though everyone must answer for their actions, the first priority of the law is to teach the adolescent to develop a sense of responsibility for the offence that she has committed. It also has to be fair and fit the seriousness of the crime. Finally, the law is supposed to help the adolescent to adapt to, and re-enter, her society.

Possible choices

The law allows the judge to impose a whole range of sentences on the adolescent, from a simple warning to placement in detention, to a combination of several elements.

There are punishments that don’t involve detention, where the adolescent is able to keep a measure of freedom. Among these we find reprimands, fines, compensation, reimbursement, volunteer work in the community, etc. There are also sentences that involve detention — that take away the person’s liberty. In fact, detention is like a prison sentence given to an adult, except the adolescent stays in a Youth Centre instead of a prison or penitentiary. Finally, there are other sentences which offer additional choices for the judge who could otherwise order a detention sentence. These include participating in an intensive support and supervision programme, or a custody and supervision order, which involves an intensive programme of rehabilitation.

An appeal is the way a convicted person or a prosecutor opposes the decision of a judge in front of another court: a court of appeal.

The Youth Criminal Justice System allows people to appeal a decision given by the Youth Court, whether it be a verdict of guilt, an acquittal (not guilty verdict) or a sentence.


Choosing an appeal court

The court that will hear an appeal depends on the type of offence tried in the original hearing. If it was a summary conviction offence – shoplifting, for example – the appeal is made at the Superior Court of Québec.

If it involved an indictable offence (serious crimes like robbery, murder, attempted murder), the person wanting to appeal goes directly to the Court of Appeal of Québec.

There is a Superior Court and a Court of Appeal in every Canadian province, though they are often known by different names. Some cases go as far as the Supreme Court of Canada, the highest court in the country. The decisions of the Supreme Court of Canada are final (there is no appeal).

When an appeal is made, the court considering it will not change the first judge’s decision unless there is an obvious error, serious enough to have influenced the outcome of the case. It’s not enough for the appeal judge to have an opinion that is just a bit different from that of the first judge.