When you enter a guilty plea in a criminal case, your lawyer and the Crown prosecutor may agree on a recommended sentence. This is called a joint submission or joint position. In the just issued case of R v Nakashook, 2025 NUCA 1, the Nunavut Court of Appeal reaffirmed the importance of joint submissions and how they should be treated by sentencing judges. If you are facing criminal charges, here’s what you need to know.

What Is a Joint Submission?

A joint submission is an agreement between the defence and the prosecution on what sentence should be imposed. This agreement is presented to the judge, who must decide whether to accept it.

Joint submissions are critical to the justice system because they help resolve cases efficiently, reducing the need for trials, which can be time-consuming and stressful for everyone involved, including complainants. They also provide certainty for accused persons, who can make informed decisions about pleading guilty with the assurance of a predictable sentence.

When Can a Judge Reject a Joint Submission?

Judges do not automatically accept joint submissions. However, the Supreme Court of Canada, in R v Anthony-Cook (2016), set a high threshold for rejecting them. A judge should only depart from a joint submission if doing so is necessary to prevent the administration of justice from falling into disrepute. This means the proposed sentence must be so unreasonable that a well-informed person would see it as a failure of the justice system.

What Happened in R v Nakashook?

In R v Nakashook, the accused pleaded guilty to attempted murder and unlawful confinement. The Crown and defence jointly proposed a 7-year sentence. However, the sentencing judge rejected the joint submission and imposed a 12-year sentence instead, stating that the proposed 7-year sentence was too lenient.

The Nunavut Court of Appeal overturned this decision, emphasizing that the sentencing judge had failed to apply the correct legal test. The court reinstated the 7-year sentence, reaffirming that judges should not lightly disregard joint submissions and must consider the systemic benefits they provide.

Why This Matters for You

If you are charged with a criminal offence and considering a guilty plea, a joint submission can be a crucial tool in securing a fair and predictable sentence. However, it is essential to understand that:

• Your lawyer and the Crown must negotiate a reasonable joint submission.

• The judge should generally accept it unless it is so unreasonable that it would harm the public’s confidence in the justice system.

• If a judge rejects a joint submission, there may be grounds for an appeal, as seen in R v Nakashook.

Joint submissions play a vital role in ensuring fairness and efficiency in the criminal justice system. If you are facing charges, discussing the possibility of a joint submission with your lawyer can help you make informed decisions about your case. The Nakashook decision reinforces the principle that joint submissions should not be rejected lightly, providing greater certainty for accused persons navigating the system.

If you have questions about your case or joint submissions, consult a criminal defence lawyer who can guide you through the process and advocate for your best interests.

A new case about privacy and admissibility of evidence in sexual assault cases in Nunavut! 

In the recent case of R v NN, 2024 NUCJ 36, the Nunavut Court of Justice tackled some important questions about what kind of evidence can be used in a sexual assault trial.

The case involved text messages, photos, and Snapchat conversations, and whether they could be considered private "records" - or if they could be used to unfairly influence the jury.

These are the Key takeaways from this new decision:

• Protecting privacy: The Court emphasized the importance of safeguarding the complainant's privacy and preventing the use of evidence that could perpetuate harmful stereotypes.

• Balancing rights: The Court carefully weighed the defendant's right to a fair trial against the need to protect the complainant's privacy and dignity.

• Context matters: Whether a message or photo is considered private depends on the specific circumstances and the nature of the information shared.

It can be unsettling when the police show up at your home. Here's what you need to know to protect yourself and understand your rights:

1. Do NOT open the door automatically. You have the right to remain silent and not let them in.

2. Ask if they have a warrant. If they say they do, ask to see it through the window or slip it under the door. Make sure it has the correct address and a judge's signature.

3. If they don't have a warrant, you can say:

   1. "I do not consent to you entering my home."

   2. "I do not want to talk to you without a lawyer present."

   3. "I will not open my door for you."

4. If they insist on coming in without a warrant, DO NOT physically resist.  Step aside but clearly say you do not consent to them coming in.

5. If you are arrested, stay calm and ask for a lawyer immediately. DO NOT answer any questions or give the police any information.

Important notes:

• Be polite and cooperative, but firm in telling them your rights.

• Do not answer any questions or engage in conversation without a lawyer.

• Contact a lawyer as soon as possible.

Remember: You have the right to remain silent, the right to a lawyer, and the right to refuse entry to your home without a warrant.

The phrase "be gay, do crime" is a popular slogan that celebrates rebellion and subversion in queer communities, often as a response to historical and ongoing marginalization. It's a playful, tongue-in-cheek way of embracing non-confirmity and challenging societal norms that have excluded and criminalized 2SLGBTQ+ people. The slogan reflects a sense of empowerment, pride, and resistance against systems that have historically deemed queerness itself as "deviant" and criminal. When being our true, authentic selves is criminalized, it calls to question other pieces of the legal framework imposed on us by the state.

Rather than promoting literal criminal activity, "be gay, do crime" symbolizes resistance to oppression, advocating for self-expression and personal freedom in the face of restrictive conventions. 

Law is not often a place queer folks feel safe. With members of the bar scoffing at stating their own pronouns in court and dead names published on public dockets, queer clients deserve representation they can feel safe navigating the system with.

While silly and playful, messaging that resonates with and tells queer clients that they are welcome to be themselves when accessing legal counsel is important. Especially now when trans rights are taking blow after blow across the country. You can feel safe to be yourself while working with anyone at Perrie Law.