R. v. B.B.(WR)

(Calgary Court of Justice - Criminal Administrative/Fingerprints). In most cases, whenever a person is charged with a criminal code offence fingerprints will be taken at arrest processing, or if the accused is not transported to arrest processing, but is released on paper -- by way of an Appearance Notice or Undertaking -- a date for attendance at the Calgary Police Service (CPS) Identification Section at the Westwinds Campus is required. Attending for fingerprinting when facing a criminal charge is mandating by both the Criminal Code of Canada and the Identification of Criminals Act.  Accordingly, failing to attend for fingerprints triggers a kind of criminal law administration charge labelled "failing to attend for the purpose of identification". While this is usually not a particularly serious Criminal Code offence, a conviction can result in a criminal record.  Though the penalty may not be particularly egregious, the criminal record entry along with the time commitment and potential additional legal fees paid to criminal defence lawyers should inspire everyone who has been accused of failing to attend for the purpose of identification/fingerprinting, to take this obligation seriously. 

Occasionally, people attend late, which can trigger a charge. Sometimes the charges are triggered accidentally. In many cases, accused persons think that because the police have collected fingerprints in relation to other charges that they don't have to attend again (because police already have their prints). It is important to understand that if a date for fingerprinting has been indicated on an appearance notice or undertaking, it is incumbent on the accused to attend on the date written or even a short time prior to that date. Missing that date is almost always a mistake that can both complicate and exacerbate costs defending the substantive or initiating charge. 

In BB's case, the accused failed to attend for fingerprinting based on the fact that police had collected fingerprints in relation to an unrelated charge that was about a year prior, withdrawn. BB's new substantive charge was ultimately resolved by way of a peace bond and that charge was withdrawn. The warrant for failing to appear for fingerprints was executed months after the initiating criminal charge was successfully managed (ultimately a withdrawal). 

BB's Calgary criminal lawyer, David Chow, communicated with the Crown about the history of the case and the error made by BB in thinking that police already had prints from an earlier case.  Ultimately, BB did provide the fingerprints that were required. Initially, the Crown was unresponsive to BB's request to have the charges withdrawn and the case was scheduled for trial. The defence was that BB did not intend to avoid fingerprints, but simply missed the fingerprinting date based on an honest but mistaken view that fingerprints were already on record from a previous case. Once the case was set for trial, the Prosecutor's office took a closer look, realized that BB had a viable defence and that BB had corrected the fingerprinting issue, and withdrew the charge. In this case, the prosecutor's view was that even though it believed that a reasonable likelihood of conviction existed, there was no public interest in prosecuting the case. 

"Public interest" in BB's case concerned not only the use of judicial resources to pursue a charge for which the accused had a reasoanble defence, but also that BB had ultimately provided the fingerprints required. The Crown was aware that BB was forced to pay additional legal fees to the defence lawyer to manage this error. While not a direct criminal law consequence to BB, the payment of legal fees was nevertheless an indirect financial consequence. 

Charged with failing to appear for fingerprinting? While this may not be the most serious Criminal Code offence, the fact is, a conviction can nevertheless result in a criminal record.  Therefore, it is incumbent on everyone who is charged with a criminal offence to ensure that they hire the right criminal defence lawyers. While there are many Calgary criminal lawyers who have hung a shingle and are prepared to take your hard earned money, the fact is, not every lawyer is capable of properly defending a criminal case.  With that in mind, it is important to take all reasonable steps to ensure that you hire the right criminal defence lawyer at first instance. Do your research. Take advantage of the free consultation offered by many defence lawyers. Listen to what they have to say and consider how the lawyer communicates. While any lawyer can claim in an initial free telephone consultation to be the best, to be successful and capable, use your good sense to filter out the sales job in favour of retaining a defence who can do the job. There are many lawyers advertising to be best criminal defence lawyers who have sold clients on their value while consistently failing to deliver results. Also, in view, any criminal defence lawyer who claims that they never lose, always win, has a 100% success rate -- and I have interacted with some of these lawyers -- is almost assuredly lying to you. Remember, every case depends on evidence and sometimes evidence is insurmountable.  Any defence lawyer who has done enough cases, has run into these situations. My advice: avoid the used car salesman; hire an experienced criminal defence lawyer who will honestly communicate with you about your case. Lawyers who tell you what you want to hear instead of what you need to hire or more likely to let you down.