The Criminal Code of Canada - Section 335 (1) &
This essay The Criminal Code of Canada - Section 335 (1) & has a total of 1420 words and 16 pages.
The Criminal Code of Canada - Section 335 (1) & 335 (1.1)
CRIM 230 C100
September 21, 2014
The Canadian criminal justice system is founded upon the principle that any citizen of Canada,
whilst under investigation to have committed or have influenced or associated in any way to any
alleged criminal behaviour, is afforded the assumption of innocence until proven beyond a
reasonable doubt he or she committed a culpable act (actus reus) and constructed and maintained
a guilty mind (mens rea) (Verdun-Jones, 2011, p.23). In essence, these two elements coincide in
formulating the legal parameters for which the Crown must demonstrate upon the accused in
order to successfully achieve conviction; subsequentially, the absence of either the criminal act
or the intent of the accused to commit a crime may lead to the charges being dismissed.
Nonetheless, the interpretation of this formula is not without exception; as is evident throughout
past judicial decisions, in which a particular case may present an extraordinary set of
circumstance (Verdun-Jones, 2012, p.52).
Consider a case involving the theft of a motor vehicle. An individual (for this example named
Pinch), takes a vehicle without the owners consent, contrary to the provisions of s.322(1) and
s.311.1(1) of the Criminal Code (1985). In order to form actus reus, the Crown must prove there
was in fact a criminal act committed by founding the 3 elements of the actus reus: the conduct
(or voluntary act), the relevant circumstances of the offence, and the consequence of the conduct
(Verdun-Jones, 2011, p.29). If the evidence supplied by the Crown in attempt to associate the
criminal act to the accused is deemed to be valid, the Crown must then attempt to correlate the
conduct with that of an active criminal intent or awareness; once both the actus reus and mens
rea elements coincide, the Crown can assert that a crime has been committed (Verdun-Jones,
However, situational elements can warrant the consideration for a provision to be expanded. For
instance, suppose the individual discussed earlier (Pinch) who stole a vehicle were to approach
an acquaintance (for this example, named Dombey). Pinch then convinces Dombey to enter the
vehicle as a passenger. Upon entering the vehicle, Pinch drives off without informing Dombey
that the vehicle is stolen. After they start driving, the police begin pursuing the stolen vehicle. As
Pinch radically increases the vehicles speed, Dombey is informed by Pinch that the vehicle is
stolen. Dombey is now contrary to the provisions under Section 335(1) of the Criminal Code
(1985), which addresses the offence of being the occupant of a motor vehicle knowing that it was
taken without the owner's consent:
(1) every one who, without consent of the owner, takes a motor vehicle or vessel with intent to drive, use, navigate, or operate it or cause it be driven, used, navigated or operated, or is an occupant of a motor vehicle or vessel knowing that it was taken without the consent of the owner, is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.
Significantly, in this instance the Crown does not have to address whether or not the occupant
was involved in the actus reus, or actual taking of the vehicle; rather, it must be proved that the
accused was found to be occupying the vehicle with a guilty mind (or knowledge of the criminal
act) at the time of the offence (Verdun-Jones, 2011, p.29).
There does exist, however, a subsection of s.335(1) that affords the now accused occupant
Dombey with a possible excuse or defence (Verdun-Jones, 2011, p.29). Section 335 (1.1) of the
Criminal Code (1985) states:
Subsection (1) does not apply to an occupant of a motor vehicle or vessel who, on becoming aware that it was taken without the consent of the owner, attempted to leave the motor vehicle or vessel, to the extent that it was feasible to do so, or actually left the motor vehicle or vessel.
Returning to the example, lets now consider the sequence of events following the moment the
accused becomes aware they are occupying a stolen vehicle. About two minutes after Pinch
dramatically increases his speed and informs Dombey the vehicle is "hot," Pinch crashes into a
tree, causing Dombey to become trapped in the damaged
Topics Related to The Criminal Code of Canada - Section 335 (1) &