Legal Project Management Plan & Checklist
How to defend a Fraud Under $5,000 charge in Canada using structured case management, alternative measures, or absolute discharges to avoid a criminal record.
What is the penalty for Fraud Under $5,000?: Under section 380(1)(b) of the Criminal Code, it is a hybrid offence with a maximum penalty of two years' imprisonment on indictment. However, absolute and conditional discharges or alternative measures (diversion) are frequently available for minor infractions.
Can I elect my mode of trial?: No. Fraud Under $5,000 is an absolute jurisdiction offence under section 553(a)(iv) of the Criminal Code. A provincial court judge has absolute jurisdiction to try the matter without a jury, regardless of the Crown's election.
Will a summary conviction affect my immigration status?: Yes. For Foreign Nationals and Permanent Residents, section 36(3)(a) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act deems all hybrid offences as indictable, triggering potential inadmissibility even if the Crown proceeds summarily.
Jurisdiction: Provincial Court (e.g., Ontario Court of Justice, Provincial Court of BC).
The Process at a Glance: The defence manages absolute jurisdiction requirements and strict 12-month summary limitation periods. Counsel secures a 12-week adjournment using an Enhanced Designation of Counsel. The defence reviews initial disclosure, conducts a Crown Pre-Trial, and explores alternative measures like the Direct Accountability Program (DAP). If unresolved, a Judicial Pre-Trial sets the trial parameters. Upon resolution or sentencing, counsel advocates against career-ending section 380.2 prohibition orders and registers any required restitution.
Key Legislation and Case Law: Governed by the Criminal Code (RSC 1985, c C-46) - s 380(1)(b) (offence), s 553(a)(iv) (absolute jurisdiction), s 717 (alternative measures), s 730 (discharges), and s 786(2) (12-month limitation period). Also governed by the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (SC 2001, c 27) - s 36(3)(a) (deeming provision). Case law includes R. v. Morrison [1984] 2 SCR 673 (statute-barred summary elections are a nullity) and R. v. Stinchcombe [1991] 3 SCR 326 (Crown disclosure obligations).
* Disclaimer: We're nobody's lawyer, because we aren't lawyers. You are, so you know better than to take legal advice from an app. We also aren't accountants or dog trainers - just digital spirit guides taking zero liability for any of this. This site exists to gather the collective knowledge of practitioners like you. Verify everything and submit your feedback on the Criminal Fraud Under $5,000 Defence - Diversionary/DAP Track matter plan to improve the playbook. THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE, it's a request for input.
This legal matter plan provides a structured workflow for Criminal Law cases, outlining the standard Criminal Defence process. Utilize these tracking templates to manage your legal cases efficiently.
Got a question about this plan?
Ask in the practitioner Discord - edge cases, rule changes, and jurisdiction-specific nuances, all in one place.