Folks, My alleged offence is rather simple - speeding 134km/h in a 100km/h zone (quoted from the ticket). Offence took place in Nov 2015. First appearance in May 2016. Asked for disclosure, and 2.5 weeks before 1st appearance got a few pages from the radar manual, and a photocopy of the officer's notes. At the first appearance I've stated that sending me disclosure 2.5 weeks before the trial doesn't work, blah blah. Case was adjourned until this coming Thursday (13/10). Between 1st appearance (May) and now (October), I sent 5 disclosure requests, asking for a typed version of the officer's notes, and an explanation of his shorthand. Obviously I got nothing. What would be the right strategy for Thursday? Push for a dismissal/withdrawal, or forget about it, try to get another adjournment, and then file a charter application, under 7, 11 and 24? If I'm asking for it to be dismissed, I intend to rely mostly on Stinchcombe (i.e. I'm entitled to it, but I'm here for a second time, and it wasn't provided), however thoughts and suggestions are much appreciated. The ticket itself has a fatal flaw, however I won't be playing that game (no HTA subsection quoted).
Folks,
My alleged offence is rather simple - speeding 134km/h in a 100km/h zone (quoted from the ticket).
Offence took place in Nov 2015. First appearance in May 2016.
Asked for disclosure, and 2.5 weeks before 1st appearance got a few pages from the radar manual, and a photocopy of the officer's notes.
At the first appearance I've stated that sending me disclosure 2.5 weeks before the trial doesn't work, blah blah.
Case was adjourned until this coming Thursday (13/10).
Between 1st appearance (May) and now (October), I sent 5 disclosure requests, asking for a typed version of the officer's notes, and an explanation of his shorthand.
Obviously I got nothing.
What would be the right strategy for Thursday? Push for a dismissal/withdrawal, or forget about it, try to get another adjournment, and then file a charter application, under 7, 11 and 24?
If I'm asking for it to be dismissed, I intend to rely mostly on Stinchcombe (i.e. I'm entitled to it, but I'm here for a second time, and it wasn't provided), however thoughts and suggestions are much appreciated. The ticket itself has a fatal flaw, however I won't be playing that game (no HTA subsection quoted).
You received disclosure weeks before your first court date. Did the fact that the notes aren't legible ever come up while the officer was there in the same courtroom as you?
You received disclosure weeks before your first court date. Did the fact that the notes aren't legible ever come up while the officer was there in the same courtroom as you?
Its unlikely your case will be dismissed simply based upon you asking for it at your next trial date. After all, you'd have to file a section 7 Charter application (citing the lack of disclosure) to request a stay. The court simply cannot dismiss a case based on a constitutional breach on its own motion or verbal arguments----without both the federal and provincial governments getting their proper statutory notice! After all, both levels of government have the right to make submissions on Charter issues---and attempt to 'justify' any possible breaches under section 1 of the Charter. So, if a JP ever does that, its grounds for appeal by the prosecutor (if they choose to proceed with the appeal). Therefore, since you no longer have time to file and serve the proper paper work to argue a section 7 breach, you SHOULD put your objections on the record and bring proof of your numerous disclosure requests. Then, they'll likely adjourn your matter. On your next appearance, you can file for an 11b Charter application (trial within a reasonable time) and argue that all the delays thus far were due to the prosecutor not giving timely disclosure. Its a lot of waiting and paper work, but that's the proper procedure.
Its unlikely your case will be dismissed simply based upon you asking for it at your next trial date. After all, you'd have to file a section 7 Charter application (citing the lack of disclosure) to request a stay. The court simply cannot dismiss a case based on a constitutional breach on its own motion or verbal arguments----without both the federal and provincial governments getting their proper statutory notice! After all, both levels of government have the right to make submissions on Charter issues---and attempt to 'justify' any possible breaches under section 1 of the Charter. So, if a JP ever does that, its grounds for appeal by the prosecutor (if they choose to proceed with the appeal).
Therefore, since you no longer have time to file and serve the proper paper work to argue a section 7 breach, you SHOULD put your objections on the record and bring proof of your numerous disclosure requests. Then, they'll likely adjourn your matter. On your next appearance, you can file for an 11b Charter application (trial within a reasonable time) and argue that all the delays thus far were due to the prosecutor not giving timely disclosure.
Its a lot of waiting and paper work, but that's the proper procedure.
@bend - the JP has agreed, on record, with me being entitled to a typed version and an explanation of the shorthand. @highwaystar - thank you. @screeech - this was discussed in another thread I've started 6 months ago, specifically relating to that particular fatal flaw. At the end, it comes down to the school of thought to which the JP subscribes, thus potentially resulting in a need for an appeal. The issue was addressed in Khoshael years ago, the city of London case subsequently, and most recently by the Ontario Court of Appeal in Farah and Mirza.
@bend - the JP has agreed, on record, with me being entitled to a typed version and an explanation of the shorthand.
@highwaystar - thank you.
@screeech - this was discussed in another thread I've started 6 months ago, specifically relating to that particular fatal flaw. At the end, it comes down to the school of thought to which the JP subscribes, thus potentially resulting in a need for an appeal. The issue was addressed in Khoshael years ago, the city of London case subsequently, and most recently by the Ontario Court of Appeal in Farah and Mirza.
The reason I bring it up is because usually they'll just have the officer pull you aside go through it with you right then and there. It's a lot easier than the alternative for both parties. I'm not sure why it wasn't offered. If it's something that wasn't mentioned until after that first court date, they'd probably have you explain why it wasn't brought up while the officer was available in the same room. But as long as you've already brought it up, then I guess you shouldn't have much to worry about.
avialaw wrote:
@bend - the JP has agreed, on record, with me being entitled to a typed version and an explanation of the shorthand.
The reason I bring it up is because usually they'll just have the officer pull you aside go through it with you right then and there. It's a lot easier than the alternative for both parties. I'm not sure why it wasn't offered. If it's something that wasn't mentioned until after that first court date, they'd probably have you explain why it wasn't brought up while the officer was available in the same room. But as long as you've already brought it up, then I guess you shouldn't have much to worry about.
The reason I bring it up is because usually they'll just have the officer pull you aside go through it with you right then and there. It's a lot easier than the alternative for both parties. I'm not sure why it wasn't offered. If it's something that wasn't mentioned until after that first court date, they'd probably have you explain why it wasn't brought up while the officer was available in the same room. But as long as you've already brought it up, then I guess you shouldn't have much to worry about. Well, this is exactly what has happened today - my disclosure argument didn't fly, and they've sent me outside with the officer, to go over his notes. Appeal, here we come....
bend wrote:
avialaw wrote:
@bend - the JP has agreed, on record, with me being entitled to a typed version and an explanation of the shorthand.
The reason I bring it up is because usually they'll just have the officer pull you aside go through it with you right then and there. It's a lot easier than the alternative for both parties. I'm not sure why it wasn't offered. If it's something that wasn't mentioned until after that first court date, they'd probably have you explain why it wasn't brought up while the officer was available in the same room. But as long as you've already brought it up, then I guess you shouldn't have much to worry about.
Well, this is exactly what has happened today - my disclosure argument didn't fly, and they've sent me outside with the officer, to go over his notes.
The no section "flaw" has taken the appeal route: Hargan, Billinger, Goodman, Wong and in 2014 Martinez...Can't quash a ticket for no section number...
The no section "flaw" has taken the appeal route: Hargan, Billinger, Goodman, Wong and in 2014 Martinez...Can't quash a ticket for no section number...
Hi - I was looking for some advise for the above speeding ticket I got this afternoon. I was travelling in Newmarket on Davis drive making a left hand turn onto Bathurst. The office pulled me over for failing to stop on the yellow light. I told her I did not feel I could stop safetly, as it was…
I have a question. I was driving recently and was caught and charged under the distracted driving law as someone called me. It mentions I have 15 days to pay but I want to consider my options. I also read in the newspaper that the set fine of $155 will be going up March 18th.
A few months ago, IDKY I still remember it, but for some reason I do, I saw this guy do this one thing that I did not know what it would be classified as. I would of called it running an amber light, but idk. It was at this one intersection where it has a green arrow for both sides so they can turn…
I was recently driving Northbound on Kipling, just south of Eglington. As I went through the intersection a black, undercover police cruiser turned its lights on and pulled me over. I believed I had been going approx. 80 - 85.
Hi. I recently got a ticket for the above offence. I was driving a commercial rig, used for soil investigations. I was stopped on the shoulder of Mayfield Rd in Caledon, waiting for traffic control to be put in place (flagmen, signs, etc) so that I could commence my work. I was stopped beside…
This is a commercial from ENGLAND, was shown on Detroit news tonight. England crashes with texting has sky rocketed so the government launched this video.
I got pulled over on friday on the 401 and was given a careless driving ticket. It was the result of another driver calling in a complaint of my following too closely on the highway. Is this for real?? Do i have a good case to fight this charge? Apparently after the police gave me my ticked the…
Need some help from anyone please. Second driving offence in 9 years time. I was driving at night and apparently my headlight was out so i got stopped. Accidentally left my insurance card at home so I ended up getting 2 tickets. One was for improper headlights and the other for failing to have…
Lots of good information on getting disclosure from the Crown here.
Now, I am just wondering if I will be relying upon evidence of my own at trial... do I have to voluntarily send this material to the Crown in a reasonable time before the trial, or only if they request disclosure from me?
