What does life look like after you’re convicted of a crime? A criminal record can affect nearly every aspect of your life, from your career to your driver’s licence. These consequences illustrate why it’s so important to have a highly-qualified lawyer to represent you in court.

Once you have a criminal record, it remains with you for the rest of your life. The police will have information like your DNA, fingerprints, and photographs. We’re going to cover how a conviction affects various areas of your life:

Emploment

The job market these days is highly competitive. It’s tough enough to find employment without a criminal record. But if you’ve been convicted of an offence, you’ll have an even harder time. If you were employed before your conviction, you may lose your job after pleading guilty. 

There are certain sectors you cannot work in with a criminal record. Employers will request a vulnerable sector check for any position where the employee has authority over someone who is vulnerable. Any jobs that involve caring for those who are sick, children, or seniors are typically unavailable to those with criminal records. 

Individuals with a criminal record may be disqualified from certain educational programs, such as child care, security, finances, or medicine. 

If you are seeking volunteer work, volunteer agencies may decline your application based on your criminal record. 

Housing

When you apply to rent an apartment, house, or condo, the landlord or property manager will use a tenant screening process. They will request a criminal background check to see if you’ve had any previous convictions. If they find that you have a record, they may decline your rental application. 

Family

If you are interested in adopting a child, the adoption agency may request fingerprints first. Then, they will use this information to see if you have any suspensions for a sexual offence. If so, your application will be denied. 

Travel

You may be denied access to another country if you are found guilty of an offence. These laws vary by country and by the nature of your conviction. 

If you try to cross the American border, the border officer will likely ask you about your criminal record. They may declare you as inadmissible to the country.

Insurance

It’s important to be transparent about your criminal record with your insurance provider. If you withhold this information, they may reject your claim or cancel your insurance after finding out. 

Be upfront about any previous convictions. Your insurer may decide not to work with you, or charge you a higher rate. 

Finances

If you want to buy a house or seek higher education, then you may need a loan from a bank. However, some lenders may be hesitant to lend to those with a criminal record. They may be considered a high-risk individual who is less likely to pay the money back. As such, you may pay higher interest rates or be denied the loan. 

Driving

After being convicted of an impaired driving offence, your licence will be suspended. The length of the suspension varies based on the severity of your offence. You may be required to complete a driving training program or rehabilitation program before you can drive again. 

Were you wrongfully convicted of a crime? A criminal record can have long-lasting effects on your career, housing, and freedom. 

At Brodsky Amy & Gould, our criminal lawyers can help you file an appeal to reclaim your life. Contact us today, and one of our lawyers will get back to you shortly. 

The post How Might A Conviction Or Guilty Plea Affect Other External Areas? appeared first on Brodsky Amy & Gould.

source https://gregbrodsky.ca/how-might-a-conviction-or-guilty-plea-affect-other-external-areas/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=how-might-a-conviction-or-guilty-plea-affect-other-external-areas

The Department of Justice in Canada defines recidivism as the act of committing another crime after a prior offence. In other words, it describes the actions of those who reoffend after their first conviction. 

Recidivism rates are used to measure how effective the criminal justice system is. If a high number of people are repeat offenders, this may indicate that their consequences were not an effective deterrent. 

We’re going to examine how repeat offenders are treated in Canada’s criminal justice system:

A First Charge

Those who are charged with their first crime tend to receive lighter sentences than repeat offenders. While this will depend on the nature of their actions, judges are usually less harsh on those who have not previously been involved with the criminal justice system. 

Repeat Offences

If you are charged with subsequent offences, what can you expect? In general, punishments are harsher for those who have already committed a criminal offence. The idea behind this is that a more serious sentence will deter future criminal activity. 

For example, let’s imagine that Person A was convicted of an impaired driving offence. Person B was found guilty of the same crime. Even though their actions were identical, Person A will receive a harsher punishment because they had already been convicted in the past.

An individual who has committed several offences is considered to be a greater danger to the community. Someone who has committed five or more offences may be considered a chronic offender. 

Maximum Penalties 

With many offences, there are minimum and maximum offences that can be issued. It is up to the judge’s discretion which to choose. If an individual has a history of criminal activity, the judge will be more likely to charge them with the maximum penalty. 

Repeat offences make it more likely that you will receive the maximum penalty for a crime. You could be charged with a life sentence. 

Lowering The Recidivism Rate

If prison sentences were the perfect solution to crime, then we would never see repeat offenders in our society. However, this is far from the case. In Canada, the recidivism rate is roughly 41%. 

Even if an individual is not charged with a crime, any contact with the police can count as recidivism. What can law enforcers do to lower the likelihood that someone will re-offend? A few ways to do so are to:

• Follow-up with individuals after they are released from jail for 2-5 years.
• Provide drug rehabilitation programs for those who struggle with addiction.
• Give people the resources they need to build their careers and find stable housing.

Seeking An Appeal

If you’ve been convicted of past criminal offences and are facing new charges, you may be subject to bias and discrimination. Some may assume that you are guilty solely because of your past. 

Are you seeking legal representation in Winnipeg? Our criminal lawyers at Brodsky Amy & Gould can help. We have extensive experience in all matters of the law, from murder charges to appeals. For more information contact one of our criminal defence lawyers. 

The post Repeat Offenders appeared first on Brodsky Amy & Gould.

source https://gregbrodsky.ca/repeat-offenders/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=repeat-offenders

If you retaliate against an attacker, can you argue that you acted in self-defence? In the eyes of the law, there’s a fine line between self-defence and unwarranted aggression. 

When a person is attacked, it’s reasonable to assume that they will defend themselves in some way. But to what extent? If you lash out at an attacker and administer a fatal blow, can you still claim that action was in self-defence?

These subtle distinctions were put to the test in the court case R. v. R.S. We’re going to explore why the self-defence claim was initially rejected, and why the appeal was eventually accepted:

The Incident

R.S. entered his apartment building around 10:00 PM. Five men followed behind him. Suddenly, one of the men hit R.S. on the back of the head with a baseball bat. R.S. fell to the ground, and his gun fell out of his pocket. The attackers began to run away. In a matter of seconds, R.S. reached for his gun and fired four shots at the attackers. One of the bullets fatally wounded the man who attacked him with the bat.

Self-Defence in the Criminal Code

In Canada, a successful self-defence argument is highly dependent on the proportion of the response. This refers to whether the action was proportionate to the force that the attacker used, or the perceived threat of the attacker.

The validity of R.S.’s self-defence claim rests on one fact: did he know that his attackers were running away and that he was out of danger, yet chose to fire anyway? Or did he fire those shots to save his life?

The Ruling

At the initial trial, R.S. was convicted of second-degree murder. The judge rejected the claim of self-defence on the basis that R.S. must have known the attackers were retreating. 

But in this ruling, the judge overlooked several important factors. The verdict to convict R.S. was deemed unreasonable for the following reasons:

• R.S. fired at the attackers after being hit in the head. This is important to consider in regards to his cognitive state. 
• The appellant is defined as a young person. It’s erroneous to assume that a minor has the same capability to make judgements as an adult. 
• R.S. had been attacked in the past. He began carrying a gun after being attacked two previous times.

Finally, it’s important to note that only five seconds elapsed between when R.S was attacked with a baseball bat, and when he fired the four shots. Five seconds is not nearly enough time for someone to make a proper assessment of the situation, especially after a head injury. 

R.S. did not know his attackers were retreating. His decision to fire at them was based on a fear that he may otherwise lose his life. There is no evidence to support the notion that R.S. was aware his attackers were retreating and chose to fire anyway.

Upon further review, the initial verdict was overturned, and the appeal was granted. R.S. was acquitted of the charges of second-degree murder, careless use of a firearm, and attempted murder.

At Brodsky Amy & Gould, our criminal lawyers have successfully argued cases at the Manitoba Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court of Canada. If you’ve been charged with a criminal offence and want to learn more about your options, visit our website today.

The post Review Of A Case: R. Versus R.S. appeared first on Brodsky Amy & Gould.

source https://gregbrodsky.ca/review-of-a-case-r-versus-r-s/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=review-of-a-case-r-versus-r-s

These days, it’s tough to sort fact from fiction; misinformation makes it all too easy for myths to become popular beliefs. 

If you’ve never been involved with the court system, you might unknowingly be misinformed about how it works. The criminal justice system is often dramatized in popular movies or TV shows, which leads to false ideas about what occurs during a real trial. 

Staying informed about the law will ensure that your rights are protected. We’re going to dispel a few misconceptions about how Canada’s criminal justice system works.

Common Myths:

Youths cannot be convicted of a crime

In Canada, the Youth Criminal Justice Act offers special protection for those ages 10-17. However, a minor can be convicted of a crime, which can have lifelong consequences.

A minor can still face sentences for criminal actions, including 2-10 years in a youth custody facility. A highly-trained youth offences lawyer can defend minors who are accused of crimes. 

You can’t dispute an eyewitness testimony

At one point, witness statements were taken as irrefutable evidence. But as time goes on, we’ve learned more about how unreliable our memories can be. 

Our perceptions—the things we see, hear, and feel—are more fallible than we may assume. Your perceptions could be distorted beyond your awareness. 

Information we learn after an event occurs may alter our memory of it. Due to memory distortions, confirmation bias, and ambiguity, eyewitness testimonies are seldom enough to convict an accused person. 

Police cannot enter my home without a warrant

In most cases, police need a warrant (signed by a judge) to search or seize your property. But there are exceptions. If a law enforcer has reason to believe a crime is currently occurring, that there is evidence inside the premises, or if they were tipped off by an authorized source, they can search a property without a warrant. 

You must answer any questions asked by the police

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms protects an individual’s right to remain silent. Section 7 of the Charter states that you are not mandated to speak to police officers. However, if you choose to answer their questions, you must provide truthful answers. We recommend calling a criminal lawyer if you are being interrogated by police. 

Only those who are guilty hire criminal lawyers

If you’ve been wrongfully accused of a crime, you may wish to believe that your innocence will free you of all charges. But the unfortunate truth is that a wrongful conviction is a possibility—especially if you don’t have a criminal lawyer in your corner. 

Individuals may be pressured into pleading guilty, even if they’ve done nothing wrong. Or, new evidence could come out that sheds light on what really happened. 

Those who hire a criminal lawyer do so to protect themselves. In the eyes of the court, hiring a lawyer does not make you appear guilty. 

If you’re looking for Winnipeg law firms, our experienced lawyers at Brodsky Amy & Gould can help. Our practice areas include fraud, assaults, domestic violence, and more. Call today to schedule your consultation.

The post Common Misconceptions Of The Criminal Justice System In Canada appeared first on Brodsky Amy & Gould.

source https://gregbrodsky.ca/common-misconceptions-of-the-criminal-justice-system-in-canada/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=common-misconceptions-of-the-criminal-justice-system-in-canada

In 2019, there were over 1600 fatal collisions in Canada, and more than 100,000 that caused personal injuries. When a car accident occurs, is it always clear who’s responsible for it, and who the victim is? 

Not necessarily. Sometimes, both drivers may be at fault; in other cases, no one is at fault.

After a car accident, emotions are high. Even as drivers are exchanging information, they may be pointing fingers and arguing about who was in the wrong. What happens when both drivers insist that the other is to blame for the accident? 

It’s up to the court system to determine who’s guilty of causing the accident. They must consider more than what the drivers themselves report. Other factors at play may have affected the situation. 

How do you convict someone when it isn’t clear who is responsible? Here’s how fault is determined after a car accident:

Why Does It Matter Who’s At Fault?

In short, fault determines who’s liable for damages—and who may face criminal charges. If you are found to be at fault for a car accident, your insurance provider may not cover any damages or the deductible.

But what if both drivers are partially responsible? In Manitoba, fault is identified based on a percentage; for example, collisions that involve one driver mean that one individual is 100% at fault. In another accident, one driver could be 25% responsible, and the other could be 75% responsible. Based on the degree of responsibility that one person has, insurance rates and claims will vary. 

The more at fault you are, the more you’ll have to pay. Fault will impact your auto insurance rates and your ability to make a claim. It will also affect your DSR (or Driver Safety Rating). 

Even if you end up with a low DSR, it will move up by one level for each year of safe driving.

Determining Fault

When an adjuster or police officer is assessing a car accident, they consider the following factors:

• Witness statements. What did those nearby see when the crash occurred? Perhaps they watched the collision from start to finish and noticed impaired driving, distracted driving, or criminal negligence. While witness statements alone won’t tell the whole story, they will play a role in how the court perceives a collision (especially if they are collected from someone impartial).

• Evidence at the scene. If the accident occurred near a business, police may use security camera footage as evidence. Damage to the vehicles and surrounding property will indicate how the cars collided. Other drivers may have dashcam footage of the collision. 

What Happens If It’s Unclear Who’s At Fault?

It would be easier if every question had a clear-cut answer. But more often than not, things are grey instead of black and white. If no decisive conclusion can be reached at the scene of the collision, the matter may need to be settled in court.

But if you are found to be at fault, you could face one or more of the following penalties:

• A criminal record
• Licence suspension
• A fine
• Jail time

Have you been involved in an accident? A Winnipeg criminal defence lawyer can help. If you’re seeking legal representation from highly-trained defence lawyers, contact Brodsky Amy & Gould today.

The post How Is Fault Determined In An Accident? appeared first on Brodsky Amy & Gould.

source https://gregbrodsky.ca/how-is-fault-determined-in-an-accident/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=how-is-fault-determined-in-an-accident

Few of us are perfect drivers; we’re only humans, and humans make mistakes. Should a momentary lapse in judgement lead to a prison sentence? Or should drivers who make mistakes be given the benefit of the doubt?

Some would argue that all drivers have the responsibility to be mindful of other vehicles on the road. Others would say that the court should forgive those who make a mistake, even if it affects other drivers. 

In the court case R. v. Chung, dangerous driving resulted in a fatal collision. Over five years, the case was heard in multiple levels of court. Chung was initially acquitted of all charges by Provincial Court Judge Gregory Rideout. Then, the verdict was overturned in the Court of Appeals, which resulted in a guilty conviction. We’re going to provide an overview of this case and the reasoning behind each verdict:

The Incident

In 2015, Ken Chung accelerated to 139 km/hr as he entered an intersection. The speed limit was only 50 km/hr. He mistimed the distance between his vehicle and an oncoming car, causing a collision with Dr. Alphonsus Hui. The crash resulted in Hui’s death.

The Trial

In 2018, Chung was acquitted of dangerous driving charges by provincial trial judge, Justice Rideout. 

The central question of the case was this: did Chung’s actions demonstrate negligence of care? Could he have intended to drive dangerously if he only sped for a few moments, despite the collision that claimed the life of the victim? The trial judge deemed that no, he could not, and acquitted him of all charges.

There was no question that he committed a dangerous act, which is referred to as an actus reus. But Justice Rideout reasoned that Chung was only speeding for a brief time. Therefore, he lacked the mens rea (or criminal intent) required for a guilty conviction. 

This verdict was met with controversy. The family of the victim, along with the community, believed that Chung should not have been acquitted. An appeal was filed, which brought the case to The Supreme Court of Canada. 

The Verdict

This appeal was analyzed by the Supreme Court in Canada in 2020. They found that, although Chung only sped briefly, he was still accelerating at three times the speed limit. The initial provincial judge’s decision was based on an error of law, wherein Justice Rideout focused on how Chung was only speeding for a few moments. This error in judgement was partially blamed on how overworked the trial court system can be.

Justice Martin of the SCC deemed that it still amounted to dangerous driving to make that split-second decision. In the end, the SCC declared that Chung was guilty of the charges. The case wrapped up almost five years after the initial collision. 

R. v. Chung demonstrates the complexities of a criminal court case. Even if someone is acquitted of their charges, the case might be appealed and the verdict overturned years later. 

Navigating the complexities of dangerous or impaired driving charges is never easy. Without a criminal lawyer, there’s no telling what might happen once a trial is in session. If you need a Winnipeg DUI lawyer, we can help. For legal representation, contact Brodsky Amy & Gould today. 

The post Overview Of A Case: R. v. Chung appeared first on Brodsky Amy & Gould.

source https://gregbrodsky.ca/overview-of-a-case-r-v-chung/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=overview-of-a-case-r-v-chung

What happens to those who are convicted of murder, terrorism, or other serious crimes? In Canada, these are known as indictable offences; they have the most serious punishments of all criminal activities. In the United States, these offences are referred to as felonies.

Unlike a summary offence, there is no limitation period for an indictable offence. Regardless of how many years have passed since the crime occurred, an individual can still be charged and convicted.

What distinguishes an indictable offence from a less serious crime? And if an individual is found guilty, what potential punishments might they face? We’re going to share some information about indictable offences in Canada:

Types of Indictable Offences

You may be wondering which crimes are considered indictable offences. These criminal activities often cause significant harm to the well-being of a person or their property. Examples of indictable offences include:

• First or second-degree murder
• Theft over $5000
• Assault
• Kidnapping
• Dangerous driving or vehicular manslaughter 
• Treason
• Drug trafficking
• Terrorism

In some cases, a crime may be classified as a hybrid offence. This means that it’s unclear whether the case should be tried as an indictable or summary offence. The Crown will decide how to proceed with the trial. 

Certain offences have minimum sentences; this means that, regardless of the situation, the judge must sentence them to no less than the specified penalty. However, there may be exceptions if the accused is a minor.

Sentences for Indictable Offences

What happens to an individual who is convicted of an indictable offence? If the accused has committed multiple offences, punishments are generally more severe. While sentences vary based on the severity of the crime, a few common punishments include:

Fines

An individual may be mandated to pay a fine for their crimes. The amount will vary based on the severity of the crime, but it may be several thousands of dollars. 

A Criminal Record

In many cases, an indictable offence will appear permanently on one’s criminal record. A criminal record can make it challenging to find employment, housing, and/or make travel arrangements. It causes issues for those who are convicted years after they have served their sentence.  

Prison & Life Sentences Without Parole

Those who are convicted of an indictable offence often face lengthy prison sentences. Depending on the length of the sentence, they may be required to serve their jail time in a provincial institution (less than 2 years) or a federal penitentiary (more than 2 years).

Undoubtedly, the most serious consequence of an indictable offence is life in prison. Certain offences, such as first-degree murder, carry a minimum sentence of life imprisonment. 

Parole gives a second chance to those convicted of crimes. With it, a person can reintegrate in society by serving their sentence outside of prison and under supervision. But if someone is found guilty of an indictable offence, they may be charged with 25 years in prison with no possibility for parole. 

If you are charged with an indictable offence, it’s imperative that you hire a criminal defence lawyer. They can ensure that your rights are protected during the trial and build a sound defence for your case.

At Brodsky Amy & Gould, we offer legal representation to those who are accused of indictable offences. Our criminal lawyers have years of experience defending people who are facing serious charges, including murder or assault. Get in contact with us today. 

The post What Is An Indictable Offence In Canada? appeared first on Brodsky Amy & Gould.

source https://gregbrodsky.ca/what-is-an-indictable-offence-in-canada/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=what-is-an-indictable-offence-in-canada

Most of us are familiar with the basic procedure for a criminal trial: charges are brought forth, a court hearing takes place, and the judge eventually decides on a verdict. But how do things change when one individual is charged with multiple criminal offences? 

It often comes down to whether a charge is seen as a summary or indictable offence. You might be familiar with these terms already, but here’s a quick review:

• Summary offences are less serious; they include charges like possession of drugs or soliciting prostitution.
• Indictable offences are more severe. They include murder, sexual assault, and acts of terrorism.

According to the Canadian Criminal Code, multiple counts of indictment charges can be tried separately. However, it is up to the court to decide whether or not to do so. 

The court handles these situations on a case-by-case basis. Depending on the nature of the offence, multiple trials may be held; alternatively, there might be one joint trial. How do court officials make this decision, and how might it affect the outcome of a case? 

Why Joint Trials Are Held

A few distinct benefits may persuade a judge to join two trials as one. These include:

• A reduced strain on the criminal justice system. If the court system has limited resources, it may infringe on the accused person’s right to a speedy trial. Joining both trials can expedite the process; however, it could impact the fairness of the trial.

• See connections between related incidents. When two criminal offences are related, having a joint trial allows prosecutors and defendants to make connections between the cases. This may work out to the benefit or the detriment of the accused. 

• Reduced emotional hardship for witnesses. Testifying against someone can be traumatic for victims of serious crimes. If two trials are merged into one, witnesses only need to testify once. This can make a difficult process easier for victims.

While these factors will be considered, the judge must prioritize the fairness of the trial above all else. If joining two or more charges will create an unfair situation for the accused, the trials may need to be severed. 

Dealing With Potential Prejudice 

If an individual is charged with multiple offences for the same incident, it seems logical to hold one trial for an event. But what if two separate incidents occurred, with each resulting in criminal charges against the accused? Should separate trials be held?

It may be more convenient to handle two trials as one, but if both incidents occurred separately and have different evidence, concerns about bias and prejudice may arise. Without separate court hearings, an individual’s right to a fair trial may be infringed upon. If multiple charges are heard in the same courtroom, the outcome of one trial could influence another. 

It’s up to the discretion of a judge whether or not to hold a joint trial. Do you believe that a joint trial will infringe upon your rights? If so, you can contact a criminal lawyer who can create a strong argument for your case. 

When you need a DUI lawyer in Winnipeg, contact Brodsky Amy & Gould. We can help with a variety of offences, including those related to theft, firearms, murder, and more. Contact us today to learn more about your right to a fair trial.

The post Do Separate Criminal Offences Have Separate Trials? appeared first on Brodsky Amy & Gould.

source https://gregbrodsky.ca/do-separate-criminal-offences-have-separate-trials/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=do-separate-criminal-offences-have-separate-trials

Our lives are governed by our rights and freedoms; without them, we would live in a lawless society. Every citizen has a responsibility to respect the rights of others—and that includes police officers. What happens when an officer conducts an unjustified search of another person?

Section 8 of The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms states that all citizens must be protected against unreasonable searches or seizures. A search can be defined as an inspection of one’s body, property, or vehicle. A seizure is when those items are taken by the police to be used as evidence.

Even though searches are necessary for criminal investigations, police officers can’t conduct them at will. Requirements must be met to justify searching an individual or seizing their property. In this post, we’re going to discuss what needs to be obtained before searches can be done, and what might happen if you are searched unreasonably:

What Makes a Search “Unreasonable”?

To answer this question, we first need to review what a police officer needs to conduct a search:

• A search warrant. This document gives authority to police officers to not only search your home, person, or vehicle, but also to confiscate any evidence they discover. It’s typically signed by a judge.
  If you find yourself in this situation, you can ask to see the search warrant and verify that all information on it is correct. Misinformation could make the search warrant invalid.

• Reasonable suspicion or probable cause. Does the police officer have a reason to believe that a person may be carrying illicit drugs or weapons? A tip from an unverified anonymous source does not stand as reasonable suspicion. 

• Emergencies. In a time-sensitive circumstance, there may be no time for a police officer to obtain a search warrant. Naturally, this clause is highly dependent on context and timing. For example, if a police officer caught an individual committing a crime, they have justification to seize their belongings. 

Are all searches that don’t meet these requirements considered “unreasonable”? Not necessarily. The police may find probable and reasonable cause to conduct a search that falls outside of these parameters. Whether the evidence will be able to be used in court, will be up to the judge to decide.

How Does the Court View Unreasonable Searches & Seizures?

In some situations, any evidence gathered during an unreasonable search may be dismissed by the court. This is highly dependent on context and the nature of the incident. 

Evidence might be excluded from a trial if it was obtained unethically. If the judge finds that the search was unreasonable or discriminatory, the case may be dismissed altogether. 

We are entitled to the privacy of our bodies, our information, and our homes. The police can conduct searches and seizures when they have the grounds to do so. But not all searches and seizures are justified, especially when they violate the rights and freedoms of others.

Do you suspect that you were subjected to unreasonable treatment? At our Winnipeg criminal law firm, we provide experienced legal representation for theft, fraud, drug charges, and more. Contact Brodsky Amy & Gould today and we can help protect your rights. 

The post Unreasonable Search & Seizure appeared first on Brodsky Amy & Gould.

source https://gregbrodsky.ca/unreasonable-search-amp-seizure/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=unreasonable-search-amp-seizure

Over the past year, it hasn’t been easy to cross the border from the United States to Canada. Travel has been restricted for nonessential reasons since the outbreak of COVID-19. 

But if you have been convicted of a DUI, you might have difficulty crossing the border for another reason. Canada takes a harsh stance on impaired driving convictions, and often denies entry to the country to those with a criminal record. Even if you are pending trial, you may still be turned away at the border.

Honesty is the best policy when it comes to crossing the border. If you’re denied entry at one location, don’t try again at another—all border officials have access to a database with your information on file. Lying about your record could be considered a criminal offence. 

Is it possible to enter Canada if you have a DUI? We’re going to tell you what you can do to gain access:

Applying for a Temporary Resident Permit (TRP)

If you plan to travel to Canada for a limited time, you might be interested in a temporary permit. 

The permissions that a TRP grants are restricted. In most cases, you can only travel to Canada for a limited number of reasons with a TRP. The permit itself only lasts so long; once it expires, you’ll need to reapply for a new one. 

Even if you are technically inadmissible to the country, a TRP is a document that grants you access for specific purposes. The application process is extensive and can take months. If you obtain the permit in time, there is no guarantee that it will give you access into Canada. 

Applying for Criminal Rehabilitation (CR)

Were you charged with a DUI over 5 years ago? Your mistakes shouldn’t follow you forever. 5 years after your criminal charges, you can submit a formal application for criminal rehabilitation. It permanently removes the “inadmissible” attribute from your file. If your application is approved, you can gain entry to Canada.

However, a recent change in legislation made this process more complicated. Before 2018, you would automatically gain eligibility in 10 years. Now, those with DUIs are no longer automatically deemed rehabilitated in Canada after 10 years. 

If you were charged before 2018, you could be grandfathered in under the old legislation, but it’s best to consult a criminal lawyer to find out. 

Misdemeanors or Felonies?

Depending on the severity of your crime, you may find that crossing the border is more or less difficult. In the U.S, crimes are categorized as misdemeanors (less severe) or felonies (more severe). Misdemeanors can be compared to summary offences in Canada, while felonies are akin to indictable offences. 

You’ll have less trouble crossing the border if you were previously convicted of a summary offence than an indictable one, but it will be at the discretion of the border official.

If you are seeking entry to Canada, we recommend acquiring a Temporary Resident Permit or Criminal Rehabilitation form first. Both these forms increase the likelihood that you can cross the border. We suggest planning months in advance so that you have time to submit these applications before your trip to Canada.

Are you facing a potential DUI charge? A Winnipeg DUI lawyer can help you create a compelling argument for your case and protect your rights. Contact the law offices of Brodsky Amy & Gould today.

The post Entering Canada With A DUI appeared first on Brodsky Amy & Gould.

source https://gregbrodsky.ca/entering-canada-with-a-dui/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=entering-canada-with-a-dui