{"id":6507,"date":"2013-07-02T14:41:40","date_gmt":"2013-07-02T14:41:40","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/doyonavocats.ca\/la-validite-dun-plaidoyer-de-culpabilite\/"},"modified":"2020-07-07T22:12:41","modified_gmt":"2020-07-08T02:12:41","slug":"la-validite-dun-plaidoyer-de-culpabilite","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.doyonavocats.ca\/en\/la-validite-dun-plaidoyer-de-culpabilite\/","title":{"rendered":"La validit\u00e9 d&#8217;un plaidoyer de culpabilit\u00e9 : LSJPA &#8211; 1315, 2013 QCCA 1036"},"content":{"rendered":"<div style=\"text-align: justify;\">Par <a href=\"http:\/\/www.doyonavocats.ca\/me-felix-antoine-t-doyon-2\/\"><strong>Me F\u00e9lix-Antoine T. Doyon<\/strong><\/a><\/div>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"><\/div>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;\">La Cour d&#8217;appel du Qu\u00e9bec rappel dans <a href=\"http:\/\/www.canlii.ca\/fr\/qc\/qcca\/doc\/2013\/2013qcca1036\/2013qcca1036.html\" data-blogger-escaped-target=\"_blank\"><i>LSJPA &#8211; 1315<\/i>, 2013 QCCA 1036<\/a>, les conditions pour qu&#8217;un plaidoyer de culpabilit\u00e9 soit valide.<\/span><\/div>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/div>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;\">Voici les passages pertinents :<\/span><\/div>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"><\/div>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;\">[<a href=\"http:\/\/www.blogger.com\/null\" name=\"par22\">22<\/a>]<span data-blogger-escaped-style=\"-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;\">\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>Pour \u00eatre valide, le plaidoyer de culpabilit\u00e9 doit satisfaire certaines exigences\u00a0:<\/span><\/div>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"><\/div>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;\">Pour constituer un plaidoyer de culpabilit\u00e9 valide, le plaidoyer doit \u00eatre volontaire et non \u00e9quivoque. Il doit aussi \u00eatre \u00e9clair\u00e9 en ce sens que l&#8217;accus\u00e9 doit conna\u00eetre la nature des all\u00e9gations faites contre lui, l&#8217;effet de son plaidoyer et les cons\u00e9quences de celui-ci.<\/span><\/div>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"><\/div>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"><\/div>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;\">[<a href=\"http:\/\/www.blogger.com\/null\" name=\"par23\">23<\/a>]<span data-blogger-escaped-style=\"-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;\">\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>De plus, l&#8217;article 686(1)a)(iii) <i>C.cr.<\/i>, qui est ici en cause, pose l\u2019exigence d\u2019une erreur judiciaire (\u00ab\u00a0miscarriage of justice\u00a0\u00bb). Lorsque des pressions ont \u00e9t\u00e9 exerc\u00e9es, il est possible que l&#8217;\u00e9quit\u00e9 du proc\u00e8s en soit affect\u00e9e en violant les droits fondamentaux de l&#8217;accus\u00e9.<\/span><\/div>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"><\/div>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"><\/div>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;\">[<a href=\"http:\/\/www.blogger.com\/null\" name=\"par24\">24<\/a>]<span data-blogger-escaped-style=\"-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;\">\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>Ainsi, dans <i>R. c. Lamoureux<\/i>, le juge Rothman \u00e9crivait, au nom de la Cour\u00a0:<\/span><\/div>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<blockquote>\n<div><span style=\"font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;\"><a href=\"http:\/\/www.blogger.com\/null\" name=\"PNUM_24\">24 <\/a>\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0Now, counsel has, not only a right, but a duty to advise an accused as to the weaknesses of his case, as to the probable outcome of the trial and as to the nature and consequences of a plea. Sometimes that advice must be firmly given. But counsel certainly has no right to pressure an accused into anything, least of all into pleading guilty. A plea of guilty must always be a free and voluntary act by the accused himself, untainted by any threats or promises to induce the accused to admit that he committed the offence when he does not wish or intend to do so. Whether or not counsel specifically told the accused that he had made an agreement with the Crown to obtain a suspended sentence if he pleaded guilty, he admits he did pressure the accused to plead guilty.<\/span><\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n<\/div>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;\"><a href=\"http:\/\/www.blogger.com\/null\" name=\"PNUM_25\">25 <\/a>\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0It may well be that there is a fine line between &#8220;advice&#8221; and &#8220;pressure&#8221; in some cases, but in this case both versions, that of counsel as well as that of the accused, indicate that counsel was on the wrong side of that line. His conduct, by his own admission, went beyond permissible professional conduct in a criminal trial.<\/span><\/div>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"><\/div>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"><\/div>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;\"><a href=\"http:\/\/www.blogger.com\/null\" name=\"PNUM_26\">26 <\/a>\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0Under our system of justice, defence counsel plays a critical role in safeguarding the fundamental right of an accused to a fair trial. The right to retain and to instruct counsel has been enshrined in the <a href=\"http:\/\/www.canlii.ca\/fr\/ca\/legis\/lois\/annexe-b-de-la-loi-de-1982-sur-le-canada-r-u-1982-c-11\/derniere\/annexe-b-de-la-loi-de-1982-sur-le-canada-r-u-1982-c-11.html\">Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms<\/a> (<a href=\"http:\/\/www.canlii.ca\/fr\/ca\/legis\/lois\/annexe-b-de-la-loi-de-1982-sur-le-canada-r-u-1982-c-11\/derniere\/annexe-b-de-la-loi-de-1982-sur-le-canada-r-u-1982-c-11.html#art10_smooth\">Sec. 10<\/a> (b)). But of what value is the right to counsel when counsel, whose duty it is to protect the rights of the accused, improperly pressures him into abandoning those rights?<\/span><\/div>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"><\/div>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"><\/div>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;\">[<a href=\"http:\/\/www.blogger.com\/null\" name=\"par25\">25<\/a>]<span data-blogger-escaped-style=\"-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;\">\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>Le fardeau des appelants est lourd, mais nous sommes d&#8217;avis qu&#8217;ils l&#8217;ont satisfait.&lt;<\/span><\/div>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"><\/div>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"><\/div>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;\">[<a href=\"http:\/\/www.blogger.com\/null\" name=\"par26\">26<\/a>]<span data-blogger-escaped-style=\"-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;\">\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>Sans affirmer que tous les reproches faits \u00e0 l&#8217;endroit de l&#8217;avocat sont d\u00e9montr\u00e9s, la preuve pr\u00e9pond\u00e9rante \u00e9tablit l&#8217;existence de pressions indues qui ont irr\u00e9m\u00e9diablement vici\u00e9 les plaidoyers de culpabilit\u00e9 des deux appelants. En d&#8217;autres mots, selon la nouvelle preuve, ils ne sont pas le \u00ab\u00a0r\u00e9sultat d&#8217;une d\u00e9cision issue d&#8217;une volont\u00e9 consciente chez l&#8217;accus\u00e9, de plaider coupable pour des raisons qu&#8217;il juge appropri\u00e9es\u00a0\u00bb. Il n&#8217;est pas question ici de se prononcer de mani\u00e8re d\u00e9finitive sur l&#8217;existence de fautes professionnelles, mais plut\u00f4t de d\u00e9cider s&#8217;il y une preuve pr\u00e9pond\u00e9rante que le plaidoyer de culpabilit\u00e9 n&#8217;\u00e9tait pas volontaire.<\/span><\/div>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"><\/div>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"><\/div>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;\">[<a href=\"http:\/\/www.blogger.com\/null\" name=\"par27\">27<\/a>]<span data-blogger-escaped-style=\"-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;\">\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>Parmi les \u00e9l\u00e9ments de preuve retenus au chapitre des pressions indues, mentionnons\u00a0: l&#8217;absence d&#8217;information entre la comparution du mois de juillet et le 22 septembre, la rapidit\u00e9 avec laquelle se sont d\u00e9roul\u00e9s les \u00e9v\u00e9nements le jour du plaidoyer, l&#8217;inexp\u00e9rience des appelants, le d\u00e9sir qu&#8217;ils ont toujours manifest\u00e9 de contester l&#8217;accusation en proclamant leur innocence, l&#8217;affirmation selon laquelle ils \u00ab\u00a0n&#8217;avaient pas le choix\u00a0\u00bb et devaient acquiescer au r\u00e9cit des faits, leur crainte de la r\u00e9action de la juge \u00e0 la suite des remarques de l&#8217;avocat, tout cela, dans le contexte d&#8217;une premi\u00e8re pr\u00e9sence en cour \u00e0 15 ou 16 ans avec le stress que cela engendrait.<\/span><\/div>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"><\/div>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"><\/div>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;\">[<a href=\"http:\/\/www.blogger.com\/null\" name=\"par28\">28<\/a>]<span data-blogger-escaped-style=\"-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;\">\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>L&#8217;intim\u00e9e soutient que les appelants ont le fardeau de d\u00e9montrer que la conduite de l&#8217;avocat de premi\u00e8re instance rel\u00e8ve de l&#8217;incomp\u00e9tence et que, n&#8217;eut \u00e9t\u00e9 une telle conduite, le r\u00e9sultat aurait \u00e9t\u00e9 diff\u00e9rent. Selon elle, les appelants devraient \u00e9tablir un pr\u00e9judice distinct. Elle conteste aussi l&#8217;existence d&#8217;une d\u00e9fense valable et s&#8217;en remet \u00e0 <i>R. <\/i>v. <i>G.D.B.<\/i><\/span><\/div>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"><\/div>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;\"><a title=\"\" href=\"http:\/\/www.canlii.ca\/fr\/qc\/qcca\/doc\/2013\/2013qcca1036\/2013qcca1036.html#_ftn5\" name=\"_ftnref5\"><\/a><\/span><\/div>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"><\/div>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;\">[<a href=\"http:\/\/www.blogger.com\/null\" name=\"par29\">29<\/a>]<span data-blogger-escaped-style=\"-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;\">\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>Ce n&#8217;est pas en l&#8217;esp\u00e8ce le cas plus traditionnel d&#8217;une all\u00e9gation d&#8217;incomp\u00e9tence qui requiert aussi la preuve d&#8217;un pr\u00e9judice distinct avant qu&#8217;une cour d&#8217;appel intervienne. La question est plut\u00f4t\u00a0: y a-t-il eu erreur judiciaire (<i>miscarriage of justice<\/i>)? Si tel est le cas, le pr\u00e9judice va de soi.<\/span><\/div>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"><\/div>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"><\/div>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;\">[<a href=\"http:\/\/www.blogger.com\/null\" name=\"par30\">30<\/a>]<span data-blogger-escaped-style=\"-moz-font-feature-settings: normal; -moz-font-language-override: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;\">\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>Les auteurs Pierre B\u00e9liveau et Martin Vauclair \u00e9crivent\u00a0:<\/span><\/div>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<blockquote>\n<div><span style=\"font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;\">Par contre, lorsque l&#8217;accus\u00e9 pr\u00e9tend que son plaidoyer a \u00e9t\u00e9 forc\u00e9, il ne s&#8217;agit pas d&#8217;\u00e9valuer si, par ailleurs, sa culpabilit\u00e9 est d\u00e9montr\u00e9e ou s&#8217;il a une d\u00e9fense valable \u00e0 faire valoir; un nouveau proc\u00e8s doit \u00eatre ordonn\u00e9, \u00e9tant entendu que le processus de n\u00e9gociation de plaidoyer ou le fait que l&#8217;avocat sugg\u00e8re, sans pression, d&#8217;accepter une entente ainsi convenue, ne remet pas en cause l&#8217;aspect volontaire du plaidoyer. Si le motif est autre et la preuve accablante, l&#8217;accus\u00e9 devra donner, \u00e0 tout le moins, des indications sommaires quant \u00e0 une d\u00e9fense \u00e9ventuelle.<\/span><\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n<blockquote>\n<div><span style=\"font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;\">Il demeure que, m\u00eame l\u00e0 o\u00f9 l&#8217;accus\u00e9 ne nie pas sa culpabilit\u00e9, on lui permettra de retirer son plaidoyer de culpabilit\u00e9 s&#8217;il n&#8217;a pas \u00e9t\u00e9 enregistr\u00e9 volontairement. Ainsi, dans l&#8217;affaire Laperri\u00e8re, le minist\u00e8re public a fait savoir \u00e0 l&#8217;avocat de la d\u00e9fense qu&#8217;il le soup\u00e7onnait de complicit\u00e9 pour avoir soudoy\u00e9 un t\u00e9moin dans l&#8217;affaire de son client. Paniqu\u00e9, l&#8217;avocat a entrepris, afin de mettre un terme aux all\u00e9gations le concernant, de convaincre son client de plaider coupable. Le juge Bisson a constat\u00e9, d&#8217;une part, l&#8217;int\u00e9r\u00eat \u00e9vident pour l&#8217;avocat de la d\u00e9fense que l&#8217;affaire se termine rapidement et, d&#8217;autre part, la pression exerc\u00e9e par ce dernier afin que son client reconnaisse sa culpabilit\u00e9. Cela l&#8217;a amen\u00e9 \u00e0 conclure que le plaidoyer n&#8217;\u00e9tait pas vraiment le plaidoyer de l&#8217;accus\u00e9. Dans ce contexte, la Cour d&#8217;appel du Qu\u00e9bec a annul\u00e9 le plaidoyer de culpabilit\u00e9 alors que l&#8217;accus\u00e9 avait re\u00e7u des informations erron\u00e9es quant aux cons\u00e9quences n\u00e9gatives qui en d\u00e9couleraient<a title=\"\" href=\"http:\/\/www.canlii.ca\/fr\/qc\/qcca\/doc\/2013\/2013qcca1036\/2013qcca1036.html#_ftn6\" name=\"_ftnref6\"><\/a>.<\/span><\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Par Me F\u00e9lix-Antoine T. Doyon La Cour d&#8217;appel du Qu\u00e9bec rappel dans LSJPA &#8211; 1315, 2013 QCCA 1036, les conditions pour qu&#8217;un plaidoyer de culpabilit\u00e9 soit valide. \u00a0 Voici les passages pertinents : [22]\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 Pour \u00eatre valide, le plaidoyer de culpabilit\u00e9 doit satisfaire certaines exigences\u00a0: Pour constituer un plaidoyer de culpabilit\u00e9 valide, le plaidoyer [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":12729,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[120],"tags":[160,161,162],"yst_prominent_words":[],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.doyonavocats.ca\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6507"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.doyonavocats.ca\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.doyonavocats.ca\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.doyonavocats.ca\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.doyonavocats.ca\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6507"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.doyonavocats.ca\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6507\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.doyonavocats.ca\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/12729"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.doyonavocats.ca\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6507"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.doyonavocats.ca\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6507"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.doyonavocats.ca\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6507"},{"taxonomy":"yst_prominent_words","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.doyonavocats.ca\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/yst_prominent_words?post=6507"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}