In France, the correctional court (French: tribunal correctionnel) is the court of first instance that has jurisdiction in criminal matters regarding offenses classified as (middling-level crimes) committed by an adult. In 2013, French correctional courts rendered 576,859 judgments and pronounced 501,171 verdicts.[1]
Lesser offenses called contraventions are judged by the Police Tribunal or the juridiction de proximité. More serious wrongdoing such as felonies (crimes) are judged by the cour d'assises.
In terms of judicial organisation, the correctional court is one of the chambers of the tribunal de grande instance. At the largest of these courts, several chambers may hear criminal matters. Such courts number the chambers to distinguish them, and they are referred to as the nth correctional chamber or the nth chamber of the correctional court.
The jurisdiction of a court such as the correctional court is determined either by:
Jurisdiction is the first question to be determined by the French: tribunal correctionnel when a matter comes before it, so that it knows whether to proceed. If it cannot, it must French: relever son incompétence file a finding of nul jurisdiction (French: exception d'incompétence).
In France, the correctional court is the criminal jurisdiction of first instance, and has jurisdiction to judge misdemeanors (French: délits). In premier ressort, it judges matters that concern the commission of a criminal offence (infraction pénale) considered a délit, similar in severity to a misdemeanor. In French law a misdemeanor is an offense punished by a prison sentence (French: peine d'emprisonnement) or by a fine of at least 3750 euros. The law sets ten years as the maximum length of a prison sentence for a correctional infraction.
The correctional court has no jurisdiction over:
Beyond these, the correctional court has jurisdiction to judge any other person who has reached the age of majority and has committed an offense. Its jurisdiction extends to co-authors and accomplices, assuming they too have also reached the age of majority. So for example two thieves who acted in concert, are co-authors of the theft, and any sponsor or silent partner is an accomplice by instigation. The three would judged together by the same correctional court assuming they were all adults. If one were a minor, his situation could only be determined by a juvenile court. Any proceedings that concern him would be severed from the correctional court case and take place only within the framework of the juvenile courts. So in some cases a matter might be examined by two different courts.
Territorial Jurisdiction is defined with respect to:
At least one of these five locations must be located within the territorial limits of the French: tribunal de grande instance for the correctional court to have jurisdiction to judge the relevant infraction.
Since its latest reform, (réforme), the French judicial map includes 177 correctional courts whose assigned territory is that of the tribunal de grande instance of première instance.
If the correctional court finds that at least one of the jurisdictional criteria is absent, it must declare its lack of jurisdiction: this means that it must refuse to judge the matter. The jurisdictional exception is an absolute of the public order, which means that even if all parties had agreed to "choose" the French: tribunal correctionnel despite the rules of jurisdiction the court has an obligation to declare itself as not having jurisdiction.
If during a trial the correctional court finds that the facts it is judging as a misdemeanor (French: délit) in fact amount to a French: crime, it must declare that it does not have jurisdiction and refer the matter to a French: juge d'instruction, whose participation is mandatory in matters of fr|crime.
Exceptions do exist to the exception of jurisdiction rule: a correctional court which would normally be without jurisdiction may in some cases need to judge a matter that arise in another jurisdiction. When a matter is judged outside of its territorial jurisdiction it is called French: dépaysement.
Finally, the law has come to recognize a practice of correctional courts, by fixing conditions where an act that can be characterized as a French: crime, rape for example can be judged by the correctional court as a lesser offense, such as sexual aggression rather than rape: this is called correctionnalisation.
In some cases, notably good administration of justice, the matter must be judged in another territorial jurisdiction than the one prescribed ratione loci rules.
For reasons of public safety, where there is a risk of serious disturbance of the peace if the trial were held in the competent jurisdiction, the criminal chamber of the court of cassation can refer the matter to a different correctional court. This request can only be made by the procureur général of the Cour de cassation, after he is informed of the difficulty.
In the interest of good administration of justice the criminal chamber of the court of cassation can also order the referral of a case to another court than the one that has territorial jurisdiction (ratione loci), either at the request of the public prosecutor of the Cour de cassation, or of the prosector-general of the Court of Appeal in the jurisdiction where the jurisdiction in question has its seat, either on his own initiative or at the request of the parties. For example, if:
the procureur of the Court of Appeal that has jurisdiction over the particular correctional court may, d'office, at the request of the procureur of the tribunal correctionnel and at the application of interested parties, transfer the proceeding to the tribunal de grande instance closest to the jurisdiction of the court of appeal, which will then have jurisdiction in the case, par dérogation aux dispositions de compétence territoriale.
Cases exist of material impossibility to hold the trial before the correctional court which normally has jurisdiction. A referral may be ordered by the criminal chamber if the court that would normally have jurisdiction cannot be legally assembled or if the course of justice finds itself otherwise interrupted. A request for referral may be presented, either by the procureur général before the Court of cassation, or by the established ministère public before the jurisdiction in question.
More often, especially in smaller jurisdictions, if the court normally having jurisdiction cannot be composed because, the first president of the cour d'appel can order the matter sent back to a neighboring jurisdiction situated in the scope of that court and designated by a special ordinance passed every year by the first president of the court of appeal indicating for each of its jurisdictions the jurisdiction to which procedures may be sent for this reason.
A lack of means in the cours d'assises in France allows some defendants to be judged by the correctional court[2] after committing a crime. This is termed correctionnalisation.[3] While illegal,[4] the arrangement often suits both parties;[5] the prosecutor or examining magistrate increases the likelihood of a shorter and simpler trial, while the defendant sees his crime downgraded to a simple misdemeanor-like délit.
A French correctional court is composed of:
For the court to sit with one judge only, à juge unique, the possible penalty must be less than five years imprisonment and the matter must concern délits specified by the Code de procédure pénale as traffic offenses (driving while intoxicated for example), or violence resulting in more than eight days of inability to work (incapacité Totale de travail (I.T.T.)) with only one aggravating circumstance. These cases are provided by Article 398-1 of the Code de procédure pénale. Paragraphs 2 and 3 of the same article outline some exceptions having to do with provisional detention and procedure for immediate appearance. In cases of the wrong judge (? -t) article 398-2 provides for a return to the collegial formation because the jurisdictional rules are d'ordre public. Usually, it is the président de la formation collégiale who rules à juge unique.
Sometimes there may be more than three judges if the arguments are expected to be lengthy. One or more additional judges may then attend, because the rule holds that one can only be judged by judges who have heard the arguments. This may pose a problem if one of the judges becomes ill, for example. Only three judges will deliberate the matter, however, regardless of the number who heard it.
The arguments are normally held in public, in open court. If publicity would endanger the order and serenity of the arguments, the dignity of the person or the interests of a third party, the plaintiff or the procureur may at their option request a closed session. This decision will be publicly rendered.
The president of the court may prohibit the presence of minors, or of certain minors. He can expel any person who disturbs the arguments, including the defendant.
The procedure before a correctional court unfolds in the following order:
After the arguments the prosecutor presents the government's demand for a sentence (réquisitoire oral). He summarizes the elements of culpability and may advocate a penalty for the defendant. His proposal does not obligate the court; it is an opinion in consultation, given the same weight as the argument of the defense attorney.