Plea bargaining is not weakness. Done well, it is one of the most powerful tools in your lawyer's arsenal, and it resolves the majority of criminal cases in Ontario.
The term "plea bargain" sounds transactional, but what it actually describes is a process of negotiation between your defence lawyer and the Crown attorney assigned to your file. The goal is to reach an agreement that resolves the case without a trial, on terms that are better than what you would face if you went to trial and lost. Plea negotiations happen in virtually every Ontario criminal case, and understanding how they work helps you make informed decisions about your own.
What Can Be Negotiated
In Ontario, plea negotiations can involve several different kinds of concessions from the Crown. The most valuable is a withdrawal, where the Crown agrees to drop one or more charges in exchange for a guilty plea on another. This is particularly common where an accused faces multiple charges arising from the same incident, and the Crown is satisfied with accountability on the most serious.
Crown attorneys can also agree to reduce a charge. For example, a charge of aggravated assault might be negotiated down to assault causing bodily harm, or a robbery charge might be resolved as a theft. These reductions reflect the evidence available and the Crown's assessment of what can realistically be proven at trial.
The third and most common form of plea negotiation is a joint submission on sentence. The Crown and defence agree on what sentence to recommend to the judge. While the judge is not bound to follow a joint submission, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled in R v Anthony-Cook that judges should not depart from a joint submission unless it would bring the administration of justice into disrepute. In practice, judges follow joint submissions in the vast majority of cases.
How Crown Attorneys Decide What to Offer
Crown attorneys assess plea offers based on the strength of the evidence, the seriousness of the offence, the accused's criminal history, the interests of any complainants, and the likely outcome at trial. A Crown with a strong case and an accused with a prior record will make a very different offer than a Crown whose case depends on a single witness who has given inconsistent statements.
This is why a thorough review of disclosure before any negotiation is non-negotiable. Your lawyer needs to know where the Crown's case is strong and where it is weak before making any representations. The goal is to give the Crown a reason to move toward a better offer, and that requires understanding what the Crown is actually working with.
The Role of Your Lawyer in Negotiations
Plea negotiations are conducted by lawyers, not accused persons. Your lawyer will attend Crown pre-trials and speak with the assigned Crown attorney about the facts, the law, and the appropriate resolution. Your lawyer must keep you informed of any offers made, explain the implications of each option, and ultimately follow your instructions. You decide whether to accept a deal or proceed to trial. Your lawyer advises.
One area where experienced counsel makes a significant difference is in knowing when to push back. Crowns sometimes open with positions that are not their final offer. A lawyer who knows the local court culture, the evidence, and the range of outcomes for similar charges will know when to hold out for a better resolution and when accepting a deal is genuinely in your best interest.
When Plea Bargaining Is Not Appropriate
Plea bargaining is not always the right answer. If the Crown's case is weak, if evidence was obtained in violation of your Charter rights, or if you have a strong factual defence, going to trial may be the better option. The guide to charges being dropped or withdrawn in Ontario explains when the Crown withdraws entirely, without any guilty plea required.
Understanding how the criminal process works from charge through resolution helps you evaluate any offer on the table with clear eyes.
The Criminal Code of Canada governs all aspects of the criminal process, including sentencing principles that guide both joint submissions and contested sentencing hearings.