« Menaces (infraction) » : différence entre les versions

De Le carnet de droit pénal
← Modification précédente
VisuelWikicode
m Remplacement de texte : « ; Offence-specific Orders » par « ; Ordonnances spécifiques à une infraction »
Destination de redirection modifiée de Proférer des menaces (infraction en Proférer des menaces (infraction)
Balise : Cible de la redirection modifiée
 
(48 versions intermédiaires par le même utilisateur non affichées)
Ligne 1 : Ligne 1 :
{{En|Uttering_Threats_(Offence)}}
#REDIRECT [[Proférer des menaces (infraction)]]
{{Currency2|June|2021}}
{{LevelZero}}{{HeaderOffences}}
 
{{OffenceBox
|OffenceTitle=Menaces
|OffencePage=Menaces
|Section=264.1
|Act={{OBCCC}}
|CrownElection={{OBHybridElection}}
|Jurisdiction={{OBJurisdictionAll-Under14}}
|Bail={{OBBailAll}}
|SummaryDisp={{OBDispAll}}
|SummaryMin= {{OBMinNone}}
|SummaryMax=  {{OBSConviction}}
|IndictableDisp= {{OBDispSame}}
|IndictableMin= {{OBMinNone}}
|IndictableMax= {{OBTime|2 years}} (property)<br> {{OBTime|5 years}} (person)
}}
 
==Overview==
{{OverviewVIII|menaces}}
 
; Plaidoiries
{{PleadingsHeader-N}}
{{PleadingsHybridList-N|art. 264.1(1)(a) {{DescrSec|264.1(1)(a)}}<Br>s. 264.1(1)(b) {{DescrSec|264.1(1)(b)}}<Br>s. 264.1(1)(c) {{DescrSec|264.1(1)(c)}}<Br> | {{Yes}} | {{Yes-IfCrown}} | {{No-Under14}} }}
{{PleadingsEnd}}
 
{{PleadingsHybridElection-Under14|art. 264.1 {{DescrSec|264.1}} }}
 
{{Section109Notice}}
 
; Libérer
{{ReleaseHeader}}
|art. 264.1 {{DescrSec|264.1}}|| {{ReleaseProfile-Hybrid}}
|-
{{ReleaseEnd}}
 
{{ReleaseOptions-Hybrid|art. 264.1 {{DescrSec|264.1}}}}
 
:''<u>Renversement du fardeau de la preuve</u>''
{{ReverseOnusCirc}}
 
:''Empreintes digitales et photos''
{{IDCriminalAct|art. 264.1 {{DescrSec|264.1}}}}
 
; Interdictions de publication
{{GeneralPubBan}}
 
; Désignations d'infraction
{{DesignationHeader}}
|-
|art. 264.1 {{DescrSec|264.1}} || {{XMark}} <!--wire--> || {{XMark}} <!--DO-->||{{XMark-Under10}} <!--SPIO--> || {{XMark}} <!--consent--> || {{XMark}}
{{DesignationEnd}}
{{SeeBelowForAncillary}}
 
==Offence Wording==
{{quotation2|
;Voies de fait
;Proférer des menaces
264.1 (1) Commet une infraction quiconque sciemment profère, transmet ou fait recevoir par une personne, de quelque façon, une menace :
:a) de causer la mort ou des lésions corporelles à quelqu’un;
:b) de brûler, détruire ou endommager des biens meubles ou immeubles;
:c) de tuer, empoisonner ou blesser un animal ou un oiseau qui est la propriété de quelqu’un.
 
; Peine
(2) Quiconque commet une infraction prévue à l’alinéa (1)a) est coupable :
:a) soit d’un acte criminel et passible d’un emprisonnement maximal de cinq ans;
:b) soit d’une infraction punissable sur déclaration de culpabilité par procédure sommaire.
 
; Idem
(3) Quiconque commet une infraction prévue à l’alinéa (1)b) ou c) est coupable :
:a) soit d’un acte criminel et passible d’un emprisonnement maximal de deux ans;
:b) soit d’une infraction punissable sur déclaration de culpabilité par procédure sommaire.
 
L.R. (1985), ch. 27 (1er suppl.), art. 38;
1994, ch. 44, art. 16;
2019, ch. 25, art. 92.
 
{{Annotation}}
|{{CCCSec2|264.1}}
|{{NoteUp|264.1|1|2|3}}
}}
 
===Draft Form of Charges===
{{seealso|Draft Form of Charges}}
{{DraftHeader}}
|-
| 264.1(1)(a)
| uttering threats to cause bodily harm death
|"{{ellipsis1}}, knowingly utter a threat to cause bodily harm or death to [complainant] {{contrary|264.1(1)(a)}}."<br>
"{{ellipsis1}}, knowingly utter, convey or cause [complainant] to receive a threat to cause death or bodily harm to [complainant], contrary to section 264.1(1)(a){{CCC}}."<br>
"{{ellipsis1}}, knowingly utter a threat to [person], to cause death or bodily harm to [complainant], {{contrary|264.1(1)(a)}}."
|-
| 264.1(1)(b)
| uttering threats to cause property damage
|
"{{ellipsis1}}, knowingly utter a threat to cause damage or destroy property contrary to section 264.1(1)(b){{CCC}}."<Br>
"{{ellipsis1}}, knowingly utter, convey or cause [person] to receive a threat to cause damage or destroy property belonging to [owner] contrary to section 264.1(1)(b){{CCC}}."<br>
"{{ellipsis1}}, knowingly utter a threat to [person], to cause damage or destroy property {{contrary|264.1(1)(b)}}."
|-
| 264.1(1)(c)
| uttering threats to cause harm to an animal
|"{{ellipsis1}}, knowingly utter a threat to [kill, poison, harm, etc] a [animal] belonging to [owner] contrary to section 264.1(1)(c){{CCC}}."<Br>
"{{ellipsis1}}, knowingly utter, convey or cause [person] to receive a threat to [kill, poison, harm, etc] a [animal] belonging to [owner] contrary to section 264.1(1)(c){{CCC}}."<br>
"{{ellipsis1}}, knowingly utter a threat to [person], to [kill, poison, harm, etc] a [animal] belonging to [owner] {{contrary|264.1(1)(c)}}."
{{DraftEnd}}
 
==Preuve de l'infraction==
{{ElementHeader}}
{{ElementLeft}}
 
{{Proving|uttering threats (death of bodily harm)|264.1(1)(a)}}
{{InitialElements}}
# {{box}} the culprit "utters, {{ellipsis1}} coveys or causes any person to receive" a communication;
# {{box}} that communication conveyed a threat to "cause death or bodily harm to any person",
# {{box}} the communication were meant to be taken seriously as a threat; and
# {{box}} any person received the threat.
 
{{ElementRight}}
{{Proving|uttering threats (damage property or injure animals)|264.1(1)(b), (c)}}
{{InitialElements}}
# {{box}} the culprit "utters, {{ellipsis1}} coveys or causes any person to receive" a communication;
# {{box}} that communication conveyed a threat to "burn, destroy or damage real property" ''or'' "kill, poison, or injure an animal that is the property of any person";
# {{box}} the communication were meant to be taken seriously as a threat; and
# {{box}} any person received the threat.
 
{{ElementEnd}}
 
==Interprétation de l'infraction==
 
; ''Actus Reus''
The ''actus reus'' is made out where a "reasonable person aware of the circumstances would perceive the words as a threat of death or bodily harm."<ref>
{{CanLIIRx|ML|jg1l1|2021 NBCA 27 (CanLII)}}{{perNBCA|Quigg JA}}{{atL|jg1l1|30}}<Br>
{{CanLIIR|Butt|jh44d|2021 CanLII 64133 (NL PC)}}{{perNLPC|Gorman J}}{{atL|jh44d|31}}
</ref>
 
; ''Mens Rea''
The necessary ''mens rea'' requires that the accused intended to speak words to intimidate ''or'' intended the words to be "taken seriously."<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|O'Brien|fvn7b|2013 SCC 2 (CanLII)|[2013] 1 SCR 7}}{{perSCC-H|Fish J}}{{atL|fvn7b|13}}<br>
{{supra1|ML}}{{AtL|jg1l1|30}} ("In order to make out the mens rea, an accused must have intended for the words to intimidate")
</ref>
 
; Purpose
The aim of s. 264.1(1)(a) is directed at words causing "fear" or "intimidation" and is intended to "protect the exercise of freedom of choice by preventing intimidation."<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Clemente|1frsm|1994 CanLII 49 (SCC)|[1994] 2 SCR 758}}{{perSCC|Cory J}}{{atL|1frsm|8}} ("Section 264.1(1)(a) is directed at words which cause fear or intimidation.  Its purpose is to protect the exercise of freedom of choice by preventing intimidation.  The section makes it a crime to issue threats without any further action being taken beyond the threat itself.  Thus, it is the meaning conveyed by the words that is important.  Yet it cannot be that words spoken in jest were meant to be caught by the section.")
</ref>
It is not meant to capture "words spoken in jest".<Ref>
{{ibid1|Clemente}}{{atL|1frsm|8}}
</ref>
 
{{reflist|2}}
===Threatening Words===
A "threat" has been interpreted to include any "menace or denunciation that ill will befall the recipient."<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Leblanc|1lk95|1988 CanLII 131 (NB CA)|90 NBR (2d) 63}}{{perNBCA|Angers JA}} (2:1) aff'd [1989] 1 SCR 1583 [http://canlii.ca/t/1ft5x 1989 CanLII 56] (SCC){{perNBCA|Dickson CJ}}</ref>
 
"Bodily harm" includes psychological hurt or injury in addition to physical.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|McCraw|1fshr|1991 CanLII 29 (SCC)|[1991] 3 SCR 72}}{{perSCC|Cory J}}</ref>
 
The test for whether an utterance constituted a criminal threat is a question of law not fact. The words "must be looked at in the context in which they were spoken or written, in light of the person to whom they were addressed and the circumstances in which they were uttered.  They should be viewed in an objective way and the meaning attributed to the words should be that which a reasonable person would give to them."<ref>
{{ibid1|McCraw}}<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Clemente|1frsm|1994 CanLII 49 (SCC)|[1994] 2 SCR 758}}{{perSCC|Cory J}}<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Batista|gckg3|1986 CanLII 4625 (ON CA)|26 CCC (3d) 413}} and [http://canlii.ca/t/21ptb 2008 ONCA 804] (ONCA){{perONCA|Lang JA}} (3:0){{atL|21ptb|19}} ("The crown is required to prove that, when viewed objectively, or nerd reasonable person would consider the appellant's poem about it to a threat to cause… Death.")
</ref>
 
Factors that are to be considered include:<ref>
{{CanLIIRx|Narwal|fwd44|2013 BCSC 340 (CanLII)}}{{perBCSC|Weatherill J}}{{atL|fwd44|16}}</ref>
# the actual words spoken;
# the circumstances in which the words were uttered;
# the manner in which they were spoken;
# the person to whom they were addressed and that person’s situation; and
# the speaker and that person’s situation
 
A conditional and future threats in certain cases will satisfy the elements of  a criminal threat.<Ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Ross|gckg3|1986 CanLII 4625 (ON CA)|26 CCC (3d) 413}}{{perONCA|Morden JA}}<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Deneault|4xx9|2002 BCCA 178 (CanLII)|164 CCC (3d) 151}}{{perBCCA|Rowles JA}}</ref>
 
It is further of no relevance whether the accused was capable in carrying out the threat.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|LeBlanc|1ft5x|1989 CanLII 56 (SCC)|[1989] 1 SCR 1583}}{{perSCC|Dickson CJ}}<br>
{{supra1|McCraw}}{{atp|524}} (cited to SCR)</ref>
 
; Identity of Recipient
Where the potential target of the threat is unknown at the time the threat is made may still allow for conviction so long as it is targeting unascertainable or identifiable group.<Ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Remy|1pcbf|1993 CanLII 3851 (QC CA)|82 CCC (3d) 176}}{{perQCCA|Proulx JA}} appeal refused (1993), 84 CCC (3d) vi (translated: "a threat to cause the death of a member of an ascertained group of citizens contravenes this section.") <br>
{{CanLIIRP|Deneault|4xx9|2002 BCCA 178 (CanLII)|BCJ No 517 (BCCA)}}{{perBCCA|Rowles JA}} (3:0)<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Upson|4v5x|2001 NSCA 89 (CanLII)|44 CR (5th) 313}}{{perNSCA|Flinn JA}} (3:0){{atL|4v5x|31}}<br>
</ref>
 
; Actual Receipt of Threat
There is no requirement that the accused intend the recipient of the threat to convey it to the target.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Tibando|6jzh|1994 CanLII 198 (ON CA)|88 CCC (3d) 229 at 231}}{{perONCA|Houlden JA}} ("There is no requirement under the section that the accused intend the recipient of the threat to convey it to the intended victim ...")<br>
{{CanLIIRP|McRae|g26p4|2013 SCC 68 (CanLII)|[2013] 3 SCR 931}}{{perSCC|Cromwell and Karakatsanis J}} (7:0)<br>
</ref>
 
; Victim's Reaction
The fact that the subject of the threats did not feel threatened by them is not, by itself, reason to result in an acquittal.<Ref>
See {{CanLIIRP|Carons|fp4dm|1978 ALTASCAD 206 (CanLII)|10 AR 300 (S.C. (A.D.))}}{{perABCA|Prowse JA}} <br>
{{CanLIIRP|MacDonald (D.)|1cf10|2002 CanLII 14251 (ON CA)|170 CCC (3d) 46}}{{perONCA-H|Doherty JA}}{{atL|1cf10|27}}</ref>
There is no need that ''anyone'' be intimidated by the utterance.<ref>
{{supra1|McRae}}<br>
</ref>
 
If the utterance meets all other requirement, it is irrelevant whether the victim appreciated the threatening nature of the utterance.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Carons|fp4dm|1978 ALTASCAD 206 (CanLII)|42 CCC (2d) 19}}{{perABCA|Prowse JA}}</ref>
To put it another way, the effect of the threat on the prospective victim is of no consequence.<Ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Nabis|1z19r|1974 CanLII 179 (SCC)|[1975] 2 SCR 485, [1974] 18 CCC (2d) 144}}{{perSCC-H|Beetz J}} (6:3) </ref>
 
It is not necessary for the victim to actually feel intimidated or actually take the words seriously. The reaction only is relevant to understanding the accused's intention in making the utterance.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Roussin|g67jb|2014 MBCA 30 (CanLII)|[2014] MJ No. 78 (CA)}}{{perMBCA|Beard JA}}{{atL|g67jb|11}}, ("is not necessary that the recipient, himself or herself, actually feels intimidated or actually takes the words seriously. The recipient's reaction to the accused's words is relevant only to the extent that it assists in understanding the accused's intention in speaking the words at issue.”)</ref>
 
; Reasonableness
{{seealso|Reasonable Person Test}}
Reasonableness must be applied in light of the circumstances in which the utterance was made.<ref>
{{supra1|Batista}}{{atL|21ptb|16<br>
</ref>
 
A reasonable person considering the words must be one who is "objective, fully-informed, right-minded, dispassionate, practical and realistic."<ref>
{{supra1|Batista}}{{atL|21ptb|24}}
</ref>
 
; Ambiguous language
It is a valid defence where there is a reasonably credible or plausible alternative meaning of the words.
 
Words such as “I’ll get you”, and “Let me get my hands on him.”, in isolation are ambiguous and do not necessarily amount to a threat to cause bodily harm.<ref>
{{CanLIIR-N|Gingras| (1986) 16 WCB 399}}</ref>
 
Words such as "I'll kick your ass" have been found to be sufficiently specific to amount to a threat.<ref>
e.g. {{CanLIIRx|Waskewitch|fkr51|2011 SKPC 28 (CanLII)}}{{perSKPC|Kolenick J}}<br>
{{CanLIIRP|H(D)|5hv6|2002 BCPC 386 (CanLII)|BCJ No 3010}}{{perBCPC|Maltby J}}
</ref>
 
The phrase “I hate you, I hope you die this time” immediately after an assault was found to be an expression of feelings and her hope.<ref>
{{CanLIIRx|Simms|g67m0|2013 YKTC 110 (CanLII)}}{{perYKTC|Luther CJ}}
</ref>
 
; Specific contexts
A poem can be considered a threat where a reasonable person in all the relevant circumstances would see it as a threat.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Basta|21ptb|2008 ONCA 804 (CanLII)| (2008) 238 CCC (3d) 97}}{{perONCA|Lang JA}}</ref>
 
A threat to "hit" someone is by itself not a threat to cause bodily harm.<ref>
{{CanLIIRx|Taylor|2c843|2010 CanLII 49583 (NLPC)}}{{perNLPC|Porter J}}
</ref>
 
An email concluding with the phrase "let’s see how long your lifespan reaches" can be a threat to cause death.<Ref>
{{CanLIIRx|Reilly|gsshf|2016 ONSC 4942 (CanLII)}}{{perONSC|MacDonnell J}}
</ref>
 
; Freedom of Speech
Where the defence allege the statement was protected under the right to freedom of expression, it would be "necessary to consider the [text] as political commentary before determining whether it's constituted a threat at law."<ref>
{{supra1|Batista}}{{atL|21ptb|22}}</ref>
 
{{reflist|2}}
 
===Words Intended to be Taken Seriously===
Uttering threats is a "specific intent" offence.<Ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Bone|gbh15|1993 CanLII 14711 (MB CA)|MJ No.222 (CA)}}{{perMBCA|Twaddle JA}}<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Standing|1szqs|2007 SKPC 102 (CanLII)|301 Sask R 266}}{{perSKPC|Harradence J}}
</ref>
 
The words must be meant to intimidate or to be taken seriously.<Ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Clemente (V.F.)|1frsm|1994 CanLII 49 (SCC)|[1994] 2 SCR 758}}{{perSCC|Cory J}}{{atp|4}}</ref>
Words spoken in jest, of course, are not to be taken seriously.<Ref>
{{ibid1|Clemente}}{{atp|4}}</ref>
A determination of whether the accused intended the threat to be taken seriously “will often be based to a large extent upon consideration of the words used by the accused”.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|McCraw|1fshr|1991 CanLII 29 (SCC)|[1991] 3 SCR 72}}{{perSCC|Cory J}} (7:0){{atp|78}}</ref>
 
In determining the intent of the accused, the judge may look at circumstances such as whether the accused had been drinking, whether he had beaten the victim while drinking in the past, and whether the accused knew that he was violent towards the victim in similar circumstances.<ref>
{{CanLIIRx|Lowry|6qlw|2002 CanLII 41437 (ON CA)}}{{TheCourtONCA}}
</ref>
 
The ''mens rea'' of the offence is that the accused must intend the words to instill fear in someone.<ref>
{{CanLIIR-N|KWD| (1993) 85 Man.R. (2d) 220}} at 16</ref>
This intent requires a subjective component.<ref>
{{supra1|McCraw}}{{atp|82}} (cited to SCR)<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Noble (P.D.J.)|2b27f|2010 MBCA 60 (CanLII)|255 CCC (3d) 451}}{{perMBCA|Chartier JA}}{{atsL|2b27f|8| to 9}}<br>
{{CanLIIRP|O’Brien|fpvd8|2012 MBCA 6 (CanLII)|280 CCC (3d) 481}}{{perMBCA|Beard J}}{{atL|fpvd8|23}}</ref>
 
The ''mens rea'' of the offence requires that the threat be made with actual menace and not innocently.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|LeBlanc|1ft5x|1989 CanLII 56 (SCC)|[1989] 1 SCR 1583}}{{perSCC|Dickson CJ}} </ref>
It must be intended "to be taken seriously or to intimidate."<ref>
{{supra1|Noble}}{{atL|2b27f|8}}<br>
</ref>
 
It is irrelevant whether the accused actually intended to carry out the threat.<ref>
{{supra1|Noble}}{{atL|2b27f|8}}<br>
</ref>
 
Intention can be inferred from the circumstances in which the utterance was made including the "words used", the "context in which they were spoken", the person to whom the words were directed, and how the words were perceived by those who hear them.<ref>
{{supra1|Noble}}{{atL|2b27f|9}}<br>
{{CanLIIRP|McRae|g26p4|2013 SCC 68 (CanLII)|[2013] 3 SCR 931}}{{perSCC|Cromwell and Karakatsanis J}} (7:0){{atsL|g26p4|19| to 23}}<br>
</ref>
 
Unless there is testimony by the accused explaining the words used, the court may infer the intent on a plain meaning of utterance in the context they were uttered.<Ref>
{{supra1|Clemente}}{{atp|762}}</ref>
 
It is not necessary to prove that the utterance was actually taken seriously by the recipient. However,
a failure on the part of the recipient to take the utterance seriously may raise a doubt as to whether it was intended to be taken seriously.<ref>
e.g. {{CanLIIRP|O’Brien|1p1h6|1991 CanLII 2715 (YK CA)|7 CR (4th) 308}} and [http://canlii.ca/t/fvn7b 2013 SCC 2] (CanLII){{perSCC-H|Fish J}}
</ref>
 
A statement made while letting out steam can be interpreted as not intending to be taken seriously.<ref>
{{CanLIIRx|Knox|fsxx9|2012 CanLII 55973 (NLTD)}}{{perNLSC|Dymond J}}</ref>
 
An angry or frustrated outburst will not be considered sufficient to amount to sufficient intent.<ref>
e.g. {{CanLIIRP|Payne-Binder|1p1h6|1991 CanLII 2715 (YK CA)|, 7 CR (4th) 308}}{{perYKCA|Proudfoot JA}} - accused uttered "they're dead" in open court during a hearing
</ref>
 
{{reflist|2}}
 
===Threat to Property===
When considered objectively, the accused must have conveyed words involving a threat to damage, destroy or burn real or personal property.<ref>
see {{CanLIIRP|Noble|2b27f|2010 MBCA 60 (CanLII)|[2010] MJ No. 19 (CA)}}{{perMBCA|Chartier JA}}{{atsL|2b27f|5| to 9}}<br>
{{CanLIIRP|Upson|4v5x|2001 NSCA 89 (CanLII)|[2001] NSJ No. 189 (CA)}}{{perNSCA|Flinn JA}} (3:0){{atL|4v5x|53}}</ref>
 
{{reflist|2}}
 
===Appellate Review===
Whether an utterance is a "threat to cause bodily harm" is a question of law and reviewable on a standard of correctness.<ref>
{{CanLIIRx|Felteau|2dpx7|2010 ONCA 821 (CanLII)}}{{TheCourtONCA}} (3:0){{atL|2dpx7|5}}</ref>
 
{{Reflist|2}}
 
==Participation de tiers==
{{seealso|Role of the Victim and Third Parties|Testimonial Aids for Young, Disabled or Vulnerable Witnesses}}
 
; Testimonial Aids
{{3rdPTestimonyAids}}
 
; Sur le constat de culpabilité
{{VictimHeader}} <!-- Sections / Notice of Agree / Notice of Restitution / Notice of VIS -->
|art. 264.1 {{DescrSec|264.1}} || || ||
|-
{{VictimEnd}}{{606Notice5Y|art. 264.1(1)(a) [treat to person]}}
 
{{RestitutionNotice}}
 
{{VISNotice}}
 
==Principes et fourchettes de détermination des peines==
{{seealsoSentencing}}
{{seealsoSentencingViolence}}
 
===Sentencing Profile===
; Maximum Penalties
{{SProfileMaxHeader‎}}
{{SProfileMax|art. 264.1(1)(a) {{DescrSec|264.1(1)(a)}}<Br>s. 264.1(1)(b) {{DescrSec|264.1(1)(b)}}<br>s. 264.1(1)(c) {{DescrSec|264.1(1)(c)}} | Summary Conviction |{{summaryconviction}}<br>(* 18 months prior to Sept 18, 2018) }}
{{SProfileMax|art. 264.1(1)(a)  [uttering threats, death or bodily harm] | Indictable Conviction |{{Max5Years}}}}
{{SProfileMax|art. 264.1(1)(b) {{DescrSec|264.1(1)(b)}}<br>s. 264.1(1)(c) {{DescrSec|264.1(1)(c)}} | Indictable Conviction |{{Max2Years}} }}
{{SProfileEnd}}
 
{{MaxPenaltyHybrid|art. 264.1(2) or (3)|'''{{Max5Years}}''' under s. 264.1(2) and '''{{Max2Years}}''' under s. 264.1(3)| '''{{Max18Months}}''' under s. 264.1(2) and {{summaryconviction}} under s. 264.1(3)}}
 
; Minimum Penalties
{{NoMinimumPenalties}}
 
; Available Dispositions
{{SProfileAvailHeader}}
|art. 264.1 {{DescrSec|264.1}} || any || {{SProfileAll}}
{{SProfileEnd}}
 
{{AllDispositionsAvailable}}
 
; Consecutive Sentences
{{NoConsecutive}}
 
===Principles===
 
; Factors
Section 269.01 creates an aggravating factor where the victim is a "public transit operator."<ref>
See [[Violent and Assaultive Offences (Sentencing)#Transit Workers]]
</ref>
 
{{reflist|2}}
 
===Range===
{{seealsoRanges|Uttering Threats}}
In Newfoundland, the range for uttering threats not involving an intimate relationship can go as low as a conditional discharge all the way to 3 years imprisonment.<ref>
{{CanLIIRP|Lyver|28lll|2010 CanLII 11910 (NLPC)|, [2010] NJ No. 92 (P.C.)}}{{perNLPC|Gorman J}}{{atL|28lll|41}} citing a variety of cases<br>
</ref>
However, for the most part when jail is ordered it is between one to six months.<ref>
{{ibid1|Lyver}}{{atL|28lll|41}}<br>
</ref>
 
{{reflist|2}}
 
==Ordonnances de condamnation accessoires==
{{seealso|Ancillary Orders}}
; Ordonnances spécifiques à une infraction
{{AOrderHeader}}
 
{{AOrder1| [[Ordres ADN]] |art. 264.1 {{DescrSec|264.1}}|
* {{SecondDNA(CtoE)|art. 264.1 {{DescrSec|264.1}}}} }}
 
{{AOrder1| [[Ordonnances d’interdiction des armes]]|art. 264.1 {{DescrSec|264.1}}|
* {{Section109AHybrid|art. 264.1 {{DescrSec|264.1}}}}
* {{Section109|D|art. 264.1 [if weapon involved]}}
* {{Section110|art. 110}} }}
 
{{AOrder1| [[Delayed Parole Eligibility|Delayed Parole Order]]|art. 264.1 {{DescrSec|264.1}}|
* {{ParoleDelayEligible|1|art. 264.1}} }}
{{AOrderEnd}}
 
; Ordonnances générales de détermination de peine{{GeneralSentencingOrders}}
 
; Ordonnances générales de confiscation{{GeneralForfeitureOrders}}
 
==Suspensions de casier et pardons==
{{RecordSuspension|art. 264.1 {{DescrSec|264.1}} }}
 
==Historique==
 
* [[History of Uttering Threats (Offence)]]
 
==Voir également==
; References
* [[Pre-Trial and Trial Motions Checklist]]
 
{{OffencesNavBar/Violence}}

Dernière version du 11 novembre 2024 à 20:18

Rediriger vers :

Récupérée de « https://carnetdroitpenal.ca/fr/index.php?title=Menaces_(infraction)&oldid=32310 »