Lesson: 24
Topic: Classifications of Criminal Offences: Indictable, Summary, and Hybrid
Purpose:
During this class, students will examine the classifications of criminal offences. At the conclusion of the class, students will be able to define and differentiate between indictable, summary, and hybrid offences.
In addition, students will be able to discuss how these classifications impact on issues such as:
The categories of crime which will be examined include:
| Indictable Offences:
More serious crimes and all crimes involving violence with weapons or
injury are called indictable offences. The maximum sentence for
certain indictable offences is life imprisonment. Other offences are
punished with maximum sentences of two, five or 14 years in prison. A
few examples of indictable offences are breaking and entering, drunk
driving causing injury or death, assault with a weapon, sexual assault
with weapon or causing injury, theft or fraud over $1,000. When a person is accused of an indictable offence, he or she usually has a choice of being tried by judge alone in either the Ontario Court (General Division) or the Ontario Court (Provincial Division), or by judge and jury in the Ontario Court (General Division).. |
Summary Offences: less serious crimes for which the
maximum sentence is six months in jail and/or a $2,000 fine. Probation,
discharges and suspended sentences are less severe sentences.
Summary conviction offences are dealt with in the Ontario Court
(Provincial Division) and are tried by a judge alone rather than a judge
and jury. Hybrid offences: are those which can fall into the summary conviction category or into the more serious group of indictable offences. Whether a crime is treated as summary or indictable is usually decided by the Crown attorney. If the crown proceeds to trial without deciding, the offence is treated summarily. Some cases of driving while intoxicated and certain assaults can be prosecuted as either a summary conviction or indictable offence, for example. The circumstances of the offence and the effect of the crime on the victim influence whether a hybrid offence is treated as summary conviction or as an indictable offence. |
Evaluation:
In groups, students will examine the case of R. v. Lavalee, 1990, pages 48 - 49. The groups will then provide arguments for and against the court's decision.
| Position | |
| A | For |
| B | Against |
| C | For |
| D | Against |
Once the groups have formulated their positions, they will share their arguments with the class.
Expectations Addressed:
The "Criminal Law and Procedures" strand of the CLN4U Ministry of Education Curriculum Guidelines outlines all of the following specific expectations. The specific expectations addressed by this lesson have been highlighted below.
Theories of Crime:
analyse the main theories that philosophers, psychologists, sociologists, and criminologists use to explain deviant behaviour;
explain the relationship between criminal law and morality and what is meant by “criminal conduct”;
explain the legal definition of a crime and the concepts of mens rea, actus reus, and strict and absolute liability;
explain the purpose of criminal law;
compare summary, hybrid, and indictable offences as they relate to criminal law.
The Criminal Trial Process:
explain the processes of police investigation, arrest, search, and interrogation of suspects;
explain pre-trial procedures, including plea bargaining and release procedures;
identify key features of the criminal trial process (e.g., burden of proof, admissibility of evidence, roles of the judge and courtroom personnel, selection and role of the jury);
outline legally acceptable defences to criminal conduct, and evaluate some of the more controversial defences (e.g., “battered spouse syndrome” defence; defence of diminished responsibility as a result of drunkenness);
evaluate the different types and purposes of sentences imposed in criminal law.
Concepts of Justice:
explain the concepts and principles of justice as they apply to criminal law (e.g., rule of law, presumption of innocence);
analyse situations in Canadian law in which principles of justice conflict (e.g., victims’ rights versus the rights of the accused);
analyse cases in which the principles of justice have been violated (e.g., the cases of Donald Marshall, David Milgaard, Guy Paul Morin, Roméo Phillion).
Resources:
Relevant web sites: