Adult criminal court statistics in Canada, 2014/2015 Adult criminal court statistics in Canada, 2014/2015

by Ashley Maxwell

One of the key components of Canada's criminal justice system is the courts. The courts interpret and apply the Constitution, the legislation passed by governments, and develop and apply the common law. The courts’ main responsibility is administering justice, by ensuring that crimes are prosecuted fairly and in accordance with Canada’s legal and constitutional structure (Department of Justice Canada 2015a). The courts are also responsible for rendering decisions regarding the culpability of those accused of committing a criminal offence, as well as determining an appropriate sentence should the accused plead or be found guilty (Department of Justice Canada 2015b).

This Juristat article presents information on the characteristics of criminal court cases involving adults (18 years and older).^{Note 1} Using data from the 2014/2015 Integrated Criminal Court Survey (ICCS), the article presents several key indicators of the adult criminal court process, and focuses on the number of completed cases (including the most common types of offences), the decisions made in cases, as well as the types and lengths of sentences that are imposed on accused persons who are found guilty. In addition, the amount of time it takes to complete adult criminal court cases and the factors which may influence case processing times are presented. Finally, this article briefly presents results by age and sex of the accused.

Over the years, decisions rendered by the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC), as well as a variety of initiatives that were put forward by different levels of government have influenced the volume of cases and the processing of those cases before the courts. The statistical trends presented in this report reflect, among other things, the progress made in implementing all of these practices and initiatives and are based on standardized reporting rules established with Statistics Canada’s various partners through the ICCS. However, it is impossible to identify a specific initiative as the source of the changes observed in the statistical trends; rather, the trends reflect the cumulative impact of these initiatives combined.

Completed adult criminal court cases in 2014/2015 at a glance

Completed adult criminal court cases decrease in 2014/2015

• In 2014/2015, there were 328,028 cases completed in adult criminal court, which involved 992,635 charges related to Criminal Code and other federal statute offences (Table 1). The number of completed adult criminal court cases decreased by 13% from the previous year, which represented the fifth consecutive annual decline, as well as the lowest number of completed adult criminal court cases that the survey has reported in the last decade (Chart 1).^{Note 2}

• The decrease from the previous year in the number of completed adult criminal court cases occurred throughout the entire country in 2014/2015. Quebec reported a decrease of nearly 20,000 completed cases (-25%), which was the largest decline in the country, and the largest contributor to the national trend (Table 2). This was followed by declines of over 10,000 cases in both Ontario (-9%) and Alberta (-21%).

Adult criminal court cases decline for all offence types

• Non-violent offences represented more than three quarters (77%) of all cases completed in adult criminal court in 2014/2015 (Table 3).^{Note 3} This pattern has been consistent over time, and is also comparable with police-reported crime statistics which show that most criminal incidents involve non-violent offences (Allen 2016).

• There was a decrease in the number of completed adult criminal court cases for all offence types in 2014/2015, compared with 2013/2014. The largest decrease occurred in cases involving Criminal Code traffic offences (-23%). This was followed by decreases in cases involving other Criminal Code offences (i.e. weapons, prostitution, disturbing the peace and residual Criminal Code offences) and violent offences, which proportionally declined by 15% and 13% respectively.

• Five Criminal Code offence types made up nearly half (48%) of all cases completed in adult criminal court in 2014/2015. These five offences were: theft (10%), impaired driving (10%), failure to comply with a court order (10%), common assault (9%), and breach of probation (9%) (Chart 2). This trend in offence types has been consistent over the last decade. However, this was the first time in 10 years that impaired driving was not the most common offence.

• A significant contributor to the overall decrease in the number of cases completed in adult criminal court in 2014/2015 was the decline in impaired driving cases. This decrease in impaired driving cases was also evident in police-reported statistics (Perreault 2016). In terms of the volume of cases heard in adult criminal courts, impaired driving decreased the most from the previous year, with 44,476 cases completed in 2013/2014 compared with 33,121 cases completed in 2014/2015 (-11,355 cases). This represented a proportional decrease of 26%, which was largely the result of declines in the number of impaired driving cases in Quebec (-6,919), Alberta (-2,533), Ontario (-828) and British Columbia (-659).^{Note 4}

• Large decreases in the number of completed cases involving failure to comply with a court order (-4,818), common assault (-4,302) and theft (-3,521) were also observed. Proportionally, these offence types declined by 13%, 13% and 9% respectively. The largest proportional decline was observed in cases involving prostitution offences (-62%), which decreased by 569 cases from the previous year.^{Note 5}

• Administration of justice offences, which represented more than 1 in 5 cases (23%) completed in adult criminal court, continued to decline in 2014/2015. This category of offences, which includes offences such as failure to appear in court and breach of probation, gradually increased between 2005/2006 and 2010/2011. Beginning in 2011/2012, the number of cases involving administration of justice offences began to decline. This offence type decreased by 11% in 2014/2015, compared with the previous year.^{Note 6}

Nearly two thirds of completed adult cases result in guilty finding

• In 2014/2015, 63% of all cases completed in adult criminal court resulted in a finding of guilt (Table 4). This category includes a finding of guilt imposed by the court, as well as guilty pleas, and cases where an absolute or conditional discharge has been imposed. The proportion of guilty cases in adult criminal court has remained relatively stable over the past 10 years.

• The proportion of cases resulting in a guilty finding varies by province and territory, and may be due to different jurisdictional court practices. For example, court decisions may be affected by pre-charge screening, which is a formal process whereby a Crown prosecutor (as opposed to police) determines whether a criminal charge is laid and proceeds to court (Public Prosecution Service of Canada 2014). The proportions of guilty findings in New Brunswick (77%), Quebec (73%) and British Columbia (72%) were among some of the highest in the country in 2014/2015, where pre-charge screening systems are currently in place (Chart 3). Ontario (54%), which is not a pre-charge screening jurisdiction, reported the lowest proportion of guilty findings in 2014/2015.

• Cases may also be stopped or interrupted for a variety of reasons (e.g., lack of admissible evidence or referral to an alternative measures program), which leads to charges being stayed (suspended for up to one year), withdrawn, dismissed or discharged. In 2014/2015, 11% of all completed cases were stayed, and 21% were withdrawn. This has been a consistent trend over the last 10 years. The remaining cases resulted in either an acquittal (4%), where the accused was found not guilty of the charges presented before the court, or in another type of decision (1%), such as the accused was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder.^{Note 7Note 8}

Cases involving violent offences result in guilty finding less often than non-violent cases

• Guilty findings also vary by offence type. In 2014/2015, cases completed in adult criminal court involving violent offences resulted in a finding of guilt less often than property offences and administration of justice offences (49% versus 59% and 72%, respectively) (Table 4).

• Among specific offence types, cases involving residual federal statutes (84%) and being unlawfully at large (81%) had the highest proportion of guilty decisions. In contrast, 1 in 5 (20%) cases involving attempted murder resulted in a guilty decision. More than half (53%) of all completed cases involving attempted murder resulted in a withdrawal. This was the highest proportion of withdrawn decisions for all offence types in 2014/2015.

• Cases involving the five most common offences in 2014/2015 (theft, impaired driving, failure to comply with an order, common assault and breach of probation) resulted in a guilty finding more often than any other type of decision, which has been a stable trend over the last decade. Breach of probation cases resulted in a finding of guilt in 80% of cases, followed by impaired driving (79%), failure to comply with a court order (68%), theft (61%) and common assault (47%).

Probation most common sentence imposed in adult criminal court

• Judges are responsible for determining the appropriate sentence for accused persons who are found guilty of a criminal offence, by considering the key principles of sentencing, and weighing various factors associated with the incident (e.g. the gravity of the offence, the history of the accused, etc.) (Department of Justice 2005). Sentences can be imposed either on their own, or in combination with another type of sentence.

• Following a consistent trend over the last decade, probation continued to be the most common type of sentence imposed in adult criminal court cases in 2014/2015, at 43% of all guilty cases (Table 5; Chart 4).^{Note 9} A probation sentence requires the offender to remain in the community and be subject to particular conditions, such as keeping the peace and appearing in court as required.

• In 2014/2015, probation sentences were imposed most frequently for cases involving criminal harassment (89%), uttering threats (76%) and common assault (76%). In contrast, only 11% of cases involving impaired driving received probation sentences.

• In 2014/2015, the median length of probation in Canada was 365 days (1 year). The median length of probation was similar among most offence types, including all Criminal Code traffic and administration of justice offences. Among guilty cases, the median length of probation was longest for homicide cases, at 913 days. However, this sentence type was only imposed in 7% of all homicide cases completed in adult criminal court in 2014/2015.

• A fine was imposed in 31% of adult criminal court cases in 2014/2015. In general, the maximum fines that can be imposed can range from $1,000 for less serious offences, up to $250,000 for more serious offences. In 2014/2015, the median amount of fine imposed was $500. Close to 9 in 10 (89%) impaired driving cases received a fine sentence in 2014/2015.

Most custody sentences less than 6 months

• In 2014/2015, custodial sentences were imposed in just over one third (37%) of guilty adult criminal court cases (Table 5). This was the lowest number (76,340) of custodial sentences imposed over the last 10 years, yet it represented the highest proportion of guilty cases receiving this sentence type within the time period. A custody sentence was most often imposed in cases involving being unlawfully at large (87%), homicide (82%) and robbery (80%).

• When looking at the five most common offences in 2014/2015, a custodial sentence was most frequently imposed in cases involving breach of probation (56%), and failure to comply with a court order (46%). This trend has been stable since 2005/2006.

• In 2014/2015, 88% of individuals sentenced to custody received a sentence of six months or less (Chart 5).^{Note 10} More specifically, over half of all individuals (57%) received a custodial sentence of one month or less. About 3% of individuals received a custody sentence of two years or more.

• Overall, the median length of a custodial sentence in 2014/2015 was 30 days (1 month).^{Note 11} The median length of custody was longest for cases involving attempted murder (2,555 days) and homicide (1,825 days), and shortest for cases involving disturbing the peace (5 days) and failure to appear in court (7 days).

• The proportion of completed cases sentenced to custody varies across the provinces and territories. Since 2005/2006, Prince Edward Island (65%) has consistently imposed custodial sentences at a considerably higher proportion than the rest of Canada (37%) (Chart 6). In contrast, the lowest proportions of custody sentences in 2014/2015 were found in New Brunswick (29%), Nova Scotia (29%) and Saskatchewan (31%).

• Similar to previous years, the main reason for the high proportion of custodial sentences in Prince Edward Island relates to cases of impaired driving. In that province, courts imposed a custodial sentence in the majority (88%) of all impaired driving cases in 2014/2015. Canada as a whole imposed custodial sentences in 9% of all impaired driving cases.

Case processing times decline

Start of text box

End of text box

• The analysis that follows represents adult criminal court case processing times, i.e. the amount of time it takes from an individual’s first court appearance to the final decision in their case.^{Note 16} There are a variety of different factors that can contribute to case processing times in criminal courts (e.g., the number of accused, the number and types of charges, the number of court appearances, the number of pre-trial motions, whether there is a guilty plea, the presence of a trial, whether an accused has legal representation and whether a preliminary inquiry was requested and/or held) (Department of Justice 2006; Department of Justice 2015b).^{Note 17} Case processing times are also influenced by the availability of court resources (judges and lawyers), case management practices, and differences in the structure and operations of courts, which can vary across the country.

• The length of time taken to complete adult criminal court cases declined in 2014/2015. The median amount of time from an individual’s first court appearance to the completion of their case was 121 days (around 4 months), which was six days shorter than the previous year (Chart 7), and three days shorter than a decade ago.

• Nearly half (49%) of all cases took less than four months to complete in 2014/2015. This was followed by 42% of cases that took between 4 and 18 months to complete. The remaining 9% of cases took between 18 and 30 months to complete (6%), or 30 months or longer to complete (3%).

• In 2014/2015, the median number of appearances it took to complete a case was 5. This number has remained unchanged over the past decade.

• Cases involving more serious offences often require more appearances, and take longer to complete than cases involving less serious offences. Homicide cases in 2014/2015 took the longest to complete (493 days), and required the largest number of appearances (19 appearances) (Table 3). In contrast, cases involving administration of justice offences had a median of 4 appearances, and took just over two months (73 days) to complete.

• More than half (60%) of all cases completed in adult criminal court in 2014/2015 involved multiple charges. These cases took 5 months to complete (150 days). In contrast, single charge cases represented 40% of all completed cases, and took about 3 months to complete (87 days).

• The number of days and court appearances it took to complete a case in adult criminal court in 2014/2015 also varied by the court level (provincial or superior court) in which the case was completed. Some of the most serious offence types, such as first degree murder, are under exclusive jurisdiction of superior courts. Provincial court cases, which represented over 99% of the completed case load in 2014/2015, had a median case length of 120 days, and a median of 5 appearances. Superior court cases had a median case length of 565 days, and a median of 15 appearances.^{Note 18}

• The presence of a preliminary inquiry can also often increase the amount of time it takes to complete a case. In 2014/2015, there were 9,179 completed adult criminal court cases (provincial and superior court cases) that had at least one charge with a preliminary inquiry that was requested and/or held, which has been a consistent trend over the last 10 years.^{Note 19Note 20Note 21} Of those cases, 7,432 were completed in less than 30 months, while 1,747 took 30 months or longer to complete. Furthermore, there were also 23,850 completed provincial court cases without a preliminary inquiry that was requested and/or held that took 18 months or longer to complete.

• Delays can sometimes cause court cases to be stayed or withdrawn. While the ICCS does not collect the reasons behind court decisions, it is interesting to look at the proportion of cases that have a final decision of stayed or withdrawn, in comparison with case lengths. In 2014/2015, a smaller proportion of cases that resulted in a decision of stayed (5%) or withdrawn (6%) were 18 months or longer, in comparison with those resulting in a guilty (9%) decision or an acquittal (25%).

• In 2014/2015, the amount of time it took to complete adult criminal court cases varied considerably throughout the provinces and territories, which has been a similar trend since 2005/2006. Prince Edward Island recorded the shortest median elapsed time, at 47 days (Table 2; Chart 8). In contrast, the median case length was over three times longer in Manitoba (151 days) and Nova Scotia (163 days), while Quebec reported the longest median case length in 2014/2015, at 239 days. Manitoba also reported the longest median number of appearances in a case, at 7 appearances, while the Northwest Territories reported the shortest median, at 1 appearance per case.

Majority of adult court cases involve males, younger adults

• In 2014/2015, 8 in 10 accused persons in adult criminal court were male (80%) (Table 6). This proportion has gradually decreased over the past decade. Compared with women, men represented a substantially higher proportion of accused persons in violent crime cases, such as sexual assault (98%), other sexual offences (97%), attempted murder (89%) and robbery (89%). When women accused were before the courts, it was most frequently in relation to non-violent crime such as theft (35%) and fraud (33%).

• Adults under the age of 35 represented 58% of all accused persons appearing in criminal court in 2014/2015 (Chart 9).^{Note 22} This age group represented 51% of accused persons in police-reported crime statistics in 2014/2015.^{Note 23} Adults aged 18 to 34 represented a larger proportion of the accused in criminal court cases involving robbery (79%) and drug possession (73%) in 2014/2015, compared with other age groups.

Survey description

The Integrated Criminal Court Survey (ICCS) is administered by the Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics (Statistics Canada) in collaboration with provincial and territorial government departments responsible for criminal courts in Canada. The survey collects statistical information on adult and youth court cases involving Criminal Code and other federal statute offences. Data contained in this article represent the adult criminal court portion of the survey, namely, individuals who were 18 years of age or older at the time of the offence.

The primary unit of analysis is a case. A case is defined as one or more charges against an accused person or company that were processed by the courts at the same time and received a final decision. A case combines all charges against the same person having one or more key overlapping dates (date of offence, date of initiation, date of first appearance, or date of decision) into a single case.

A case that has more than one charge is represented by the charge with the "most serious offence" (MSO). The most serious offence is selected using the following rules. First, court decisions are considered and the charge with the “most serious decision” (MSD) is selected. Court decisions for each charge in a case are ranked from most to least serious as follows: (1) guilty, (2) guilty of a lesser offence, (3) acquitted, (4) stay of proceeding, (5) withdrawn, dismissed or discharged, (6) not criminally responsible, (7) other, and (8) transfer of court jurisdiction.

Second, in cases where two or more charges result in the same MSD (e.g., guilty), Criminal Code sentences are considered. The charge with the most serious offence type is selected according to an offence seriousness scale, based on actual sentences handed down by courts in Canada.^{Note 24} Each offence type is ranked by looking at (1) the proportion of guilty charges where custody was imposed and (2) the average (mean) length of custody for the specific type of offence. These values are multiplied together to arrive at the final seriousness ranking for each type of offence. If, after looking at the offence seriousness scale, two or more charges remain tied then information about the sentence type and duration of the sentence are considered (e.g., custody and length of custody, then probation and length of probation, etc.).

In 2014/2015, ICCS coverage reflected all cases completed in adult Canadian criminal courts, with the exception of superior courts in Prince Edward Island, Ontario, Manitoba and Saskatchewan as well as municipal courts in Quebec. These data were not available for extraction from the provinces’ electronic reporting systems and therefore, were not reported to the survey.

The absence of data from superior courts in Prince Edward Island, Ontario, Manitoba and Saskatchewan may have resulted in an underestimation of the severity of sentences in this article, since some of the most serious cases, which are likely to result in the most severe sentences, are processed in superior courts. There may also be an underestimation of case elapsed times as more serious cases generally require more court appearances and take more time to complete. In 2014/2015, superior court data reported to the survey represented less than 1% of all cases completed in adult criminal court.

In addition, in Quebec, some municipal courts hear cases under Part XXVII of the Criminal Code, that is, summary convictions. Such cases, which correspond to an accused in an incident, are excluded from the information that Quebec transmits to Statistics Canada. Cases heard by municipal courts account for approximately 14% of all criminal cases opened in Quebec. As a result, the median processing time for cases in Quebec may be overestimated since the data from municipal courts, which normally hear less serious cases, are not taken into account.

Cases are counted in the fiscal year in which they are completed. Every year, the Integrated Criminal Court Survey (ICCS) database is considered final at the end of March for the production of court statistics for the previous fiscal year. These counts do not include cases pending an outcome at the end of the reference period. If an outcome is reached in the next fiscal year, these cases are included in the completed case counts for that fiscal year. However, cases that are inactive for one year are deemed complete and the originally published counts for the previous fiscal year are updated and reported in the next fiscal year's data release. This approach is difficult to apply in Quebec, where all cases for which data are provided are deemed completed. Information from the Court of Quebec and the Superior Court is reported using the former Adult Criminal Court Survey national data requirements (NDR) rather than the ICCS NDR. In as much as possible, the data are converted to ICCS format during data processing; however, the conversion seems to have a negative impact on the number of annual updates.

Detailed data tables

Table 1 Charges and cases completed in adult criminal court, Canada, 2005/2006 to 2014/2015

Table 2 Cases completed in adult criminal court, by province and territory, 2013/2014 and 2014/2015

Table 3 Cases completed in adult criminal court, by type of offence, Canada, 2013/2014 and 2014/2015

Table 4 Cases completed in adult criminal court, by type of offence and decision, Canada, 2014/2015

Table 5 Guilty cases completed in adult criminal court, by type of offence and select sentence, Canada, 2014/2015

Table 6 Cases completed in adult criminal court, by type of offence and sex of the accused, Canada, 2014/2015

References

Allen, M. 2016. “Police-reported crime statistics in Canada, 2015.” Juristat. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 85-002-X.

Burczycka, M. and C. Munch. 2015. “Trends in offences against the administration of justice.” Juristat. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 85-002-X.

Department of Justice Canada. 2005. Backgrounder: Fair and Effective Sentencing – A Canadian Approach to Sentencing Policy. (accessed January 10, 2017).

Department of Justice Canada. 2006. The Final Report on Early Case Consideration of the Steering Committee on Justice Efficiencies and Access to the Justice System. Catalogue no. J2-128/2015. (accessed November 30, 2016).

Department of Justice Canada. 2015a. Canada’s Court System. Catalogue no. J2-128/2015E. (accessed July 5, 2016).

Department of Justice Canada. 2015b. Canada’s System of Justice. Catalogue no. J2-128/2015. (accessed July 5, 2016).

Miladinovic, Z. and J. Lukassen. 2014. “Verdicts of not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder in adult criminal courts, 2005/2006-2011/2012.” Juristat. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 85-002-X.

Miladinovic, Z. 2016. “Youth court statistics in Canada, 2014/2015.” Juristat. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 85-002-X.

Perreault, S. 2016. “Impaired driving in Canada, 2015.” Juristat. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 85-002-X.

Public Prosecution Service of Canada. 2014. Public Prosecution Service of Canada Deskbook. Catalogue no. J77-2/2014E. (accessed November 24, 2016).

Rotenberg, C. 2016. “Prostitution offences in Canada: Statistical trends.” Juristat. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 85-002-X.

Notes