Conditional Release Decisions – Appeals

Official Title: Performance Monitoring Report 2017-2018, Conditional Release Decisions – Appeals
From: Parole Board of Canada

Appeals

Tables 100-107

Within the Board, the Appeal Division is responsible for re-examining, upon application by an offender, certain decisions made by the Board.

The Appeal Division's role is to ensure that the law and the Board’s policies are respected, that the rules of fundamental justice are adhered to, and that Board decisions are reasonable and based upon reliable and persuasive information. It reviews the decision-making process to confirm that it was fair and that procedural safeguards were respected.

Appeal Applications

• In 2017/18, the Appeal Division received a total of 474 applications to appeal federal and provincial conditional release decisions and accepted 411 applications for processing (87%).
• By comparison, in 2016/17, the Appeal Division received a total of 539 applications to appeal federal and provincial conditional release decisions and accepted 457 applications for processing (85%).
• The number of federal appeal applications received in 2017/18 decreased in all regions: the Atlantic (-21; to 30), Quebec (-1; to 118), Ontario (-13; to 124), Prairie (-11; to 109) and Pacific (-12; to 74) regions when compared to the previous year.
• The number of provincial appeal applications received in 2017/18 increased in the Prairie region (+2; to 7), decreased in the Pacific region (-9; to 9) and remained unchanged in the Atlantic region (at 3) when compared to the previous year.
• Of the 393 federal appeal applications accepted for processing in 2017/18, 10 were cancelled and two were withdrawn, leaving 381 federal applications to be processed. Of the 18 provincial appeal applications accepted for processing, one was withdrawn, leaving 17 applications to be processed.

Appeal Decisions

• In 2017/18, the Appeal Division rendered 479 decisions on 359 cases.
• The Appeal Division modified the decision in 87 appeal cases which resulted in a new hearing/review ordered in 80 cases, altered a decision in one case and modified special conditions in 6 cases. The altered decision was a decision to cancel a previous Board decision as the Board did not have jurisdiction when the original decision was made.
• The reasons for modifying 87 cases fall into the following categories found below. Note that there could be more than one reason for modifying an appeal case.
  
  

  Duty to act fairly	Cases where the Board failed to conduct adequate risk assessment (including the application of the Gladue principles), failed to ensure procedural fairness and that the right to be heard was respected, did not provide sufficient written reasons for its decision, made a decision deemed unreasonable, or where a decision was reached without ensuring that all file information was shared with the offender.	71
  Jurisdiction	Cases where the Board rendered a decision outside its legal mandate (i.e. considering pre-release information in a post-release review).	1
  Erroneous and incomplete information	Cases where the Board relied on erroneous and incomplete information or failed to consider relevant information, which had been a determining factor in the Board’s decision, as well as cases where the Board did not ensure that the information was reliable and persuasive.	13
  Breach of policy	Cases where the Board failed to apply appropriate Parole Board of Canada policy.	1
  Error of law	Cases where the Board failed to apply appropriate legal criteria for risk assessment or for the imposition of special conditions.	5

Appeal Decision Trends

• In 2017/18, the number of federal appeal decisions rendered by the Board decreased to 448 (-29%), and the number of provincial appeal decisions increased to 31 (from 30) when compared to the previous year.
• In 2017/18, the Board rendered fewer federal day parole (-13%) and full parole (-35%) and statutory release (-32%) appeal decisions compared to the previous year. Detention appeal decisions decreased from 29 to 18, UTA appeal decisions decreased from 20 to 11, and  ETA appeal decisions decreased from 30 to 12.
• Proportionately more day parole appeal decisions were rendered in 2017/18, accounting for 40% of all federal appeal decisions when compared to 2016/17 (33%). Slight decreases in the proportions for other decision types were reported in 2017/18: ETA (to 3%), UTA (to 2%), full parole (to 25%), statutory release (to 26%) and detention (to 4%). 
• Compared to the previous year, proportionately more federal appeal decisions were rendered for offenders serving sentences for schedule I non-sex offences: 39% of all federal appeal decisions in 2017/18, when compared to 36% in 2016/17. The proportions remained the same or decreased slightly for the other offender groups.
• Of the 448 federal appeal decisions rendered in 2017/18, 76% of the initial decisions were affirmed, in 21% of cases a new review/hearing was ordered, in 2% of cases a change of condition was ordered and in one case a decision was altered. By comparison, in 2016/17, 75% of federal initial decisions appealed were affirmed and a new review/hearing was ordered in 25% of cases and a change of condition was ordered in 3 cases.
• Of the 31 provincial appeal decisions rendered in 2017/18, 25 initial decisions were affirmed (81%) and a new review/hearing was ordered in six cases (19%).
• In 2017/18, 88% of all federal decisions rendered by the Board were appealable, the same rate as in 2016/17. The number of appealable decisions in 2017/18 decreased 2% (to 18,555).
• In 2017/18, the federal appeal rate decreased by 0.9 of a percentage point to 2.4% from the previous year’s rate of 3.3%. Detention and temporary absence decisions remained the most likely to be appealed, while statutory release decisions remained the least likely to be appealed.
• The provincial appeal rate increased 0.7 of a percentage point to 2.8% in 2017/18 from 2.1% in 2016/17. Among provincial appeals, day parole decisions were slightly more likely to be appealed than full parole release decisions.

Table 100.  Applications for Appeal (April 1, 2017 to March 31, 2018)

Note: More than one decision can be appealed per application.
* Applications pending refer to those applications where an extension of time has been granted to submit grounds for the appeal.

Table 101. Appeal Decisions by Decision Type and Jurisdiction

*This is a case of an offender who was serving a federal sentence, which was reduced by a court order.

Table 102. Appeal Decisions by Offence Type and Jurisdiction

Table 103. Outcomes for Federal Appeal Decisions by Decision Type (2016/17 and 2017/18)

* Includes an appeal decision to alter a release decision.

Table 104. Outcomes for Provincial Appeal Decisions by Decision Type (2016/17 and 2017/18)

*Includes a detention appeal decision for an offender who was serving a federal sentence, which was reduced by a court order.

Table 105. Outcome for Appeal Decisions by Region and Jurisdiction (2016/17 and 2017/18)

*Includes one appeal decision to alter an original release decision.

Table 106. Federal Appeal Rate by Decision Type (2016/17 and 2017/18)

Table 107. Provincial Appeal Rate by Decision Type (2016/17 and 2017/18)

* Includes a detention appeal decision for an offender who was serving a federal sentence, which was reduced by a court order.