Section 271 of the Criminal Code sets out the penalty framework for sexual assault. Canadian law does not use a separate modern charge called “rape.” Instead, sexual assault is prosecuted through the tiered sexual assault scheme — primarily s. 271, with more serious pathways in ss. 272 and 273 — built on the assault concepts in s. 265 and shaped by Supreme Court cases such as R. v. Chase , [1987] 2 SCR 293.
This post focuses on what s. 271 exposure looks like : hybrid election, maximums, mandatory minimums where the complainant is under 16, and the practical sentencing landscape. It is not a full overview of consent doctrine, evidence strategy, or charge-withdrawal paths.
Section 265 defines assault. Sexual assault applies those concepts in circumstances of a sexual nature that violate the complainant’s sexual integrity ( Chase ). Physical injury is not required. Consent and capacity issues are central to many trials, but they are not the sentencing table itself.
Section 271 then provides:
| Crown election | Complainant 16 or older | Complainant under 16 |
|---|---|---|
| Indictable | Max 10 years | Max 14 years + mandatory minimum 1 year |
| Summary conviction | Max 18 months | Max 2 years less a day + mandatory minimum 6 months |
Those ranges are statutory. Judges still sentence within the Code’s sentencing principles ( ss. 718–718.2 ), including gravity of the offence, responsibility of the offender, aggravating and mitigating factors, and parity.
Higher courts have emphasized factors that often drive sexual assault sentences, including:
From a charging perspective, a wide range of non-consensual sexual touching can fall under s. 271. That breadth is exactly why penalty analysis is election- and fact-driven rather than one-size-fits-all.
More serious allegations may be charged under:
Those offences have their own (generally higher) maxima and are outside the core s. 271 penalty table. An information can also start on s. 271 and later be amended, stayed in part, or resolved on a different count — which is one reason headline “sexual assault conviction rate” statistics are a blunt instrument for predicting your file.
Crown election is one of the first penalty-critical decisions. Summary election caps the jail ceiling lower (and, where the complainant is under 16, still engages the six-month mandatory minimum). Indictable election opens the higher maxima and, for under-16 complainants, the one-year mandatory minimum. Counsel should treat election as part of the sentencing map, not a clerical detail.
Statutory maximums are only the outer edges. In real files, outcomes turn on:
Statistics Canada court data have long shown that sexual assault files have relatively low conviction rates on the original charge and that custodial sentences are imposed in a substantial share of convictions. Those system-level numbers are useful context, not a prediction for any one accused. Charge screening, credibility assessments, and resolution discussions can change the risk picture long before a sentence hearing.
Criminal defence lawyer and managing partner of the Greater Toronto Area’s Mass Tsang law firm, Jeff Mass , notes that public attention on sexual violence has kept sentencing expectations high in many courtrooms. Mass Tsang’s managing partner, Robbie Tsang , also emphasizes that reported conviction rates on “sexual assault” labels do not capture every case where the original charge was amended during the court process. For some accused persons, avoiding the specific consequences attached to a sexual assault finding is a major part of resolution strategy — again, case-specific, never promised.
A s. 271 conviction can trigger consequences beyond the Criminal Code jail maximum, including:
Discharges, suspended sentences, fines, probation, and conditional sentence orders are sentencing tools that may or may not be available depending on the election, the complainant’s age, mandatory-minimum rules, and current conditional-sentence restrictions. Treat availability as a counsel-specific analysis, not a brochure promise.
Anyone facing s. 271 sexual assault charges should get early advice from a skilled sexual assault criminal defence lawyer . Competent counsel can test the Crown’s election theory, the evidence, and whether a resolution short of the worst s. 271 outcomes is realistically available on the facts.
If Ontario police charge you with sexual assault in the Greater Toronto Area, the Mass Tsang team can assess exposure under s. 271 and related provisions. Contact us for a free initial consultation to discuss defence strategy for your sexual assault charges .
