Thanks to the good folks at Ticket Combat and here I finally prevailed after 2.5 years of the runaround regarding my talking on a cellphone and invalid permit sticker charges. First off, I wasn't guilty on the first count and the second was really no contest - I simply forgot about it. Anyway, 13 months for the original trial, then they ran out of time and it got pushed back to 20 months. At that point I asked for a preliminary motion to stay the charges without filing notice - common sense, right? - and the Crown and judge said I wasn't permitted to to that. Turns out that I was. Under the rules of the court - Courts of Justice Act. - you can ask for a motion without filing notice. The judge doesn't have to grant it, but they do at least need to hear it.

R.R.O. 1990, REGULATION 200

RULES OF THE ONTARIO COURT (PROVINCIAL DIVISION) IN PROVINCIAL OFFENCES PROCEEDINGS

(7) An application or motion may be heard without notice,

(a) on consent; or

(b) where, having regard to the subject-matter or the circumstances of the application or motion, it would not be unjust to hear the application or motion without notice.

So I cited this today first speaking with the Crown and she said that it didn't apply. I said 'It seems reasonably clear to me that it does apply. If, however, you disagree, we can let the judge make a ruling. Further I'll be asking the law society for a peer review because it seems you're unaware of some rather important points regarding procedural law." She scowled at me and told me to take a seat. And then as a last jab mad me sit there for a full two hours while the rest of the docket was cleared before I was called up and at which time withdrew both charges. So yes, even though I did file all the requisite paperwork - and I had an argument against the officer anyway - I suppose the aspect of dealing with a formal review was just too much of a pain in the ass for her and voila! So yeah, cite those rules and regulations! Stick it to the man! And may the Force be with you!

Good Work.

Cheers

Viper1

If I understood the above correctly, you don't need to go through the tedious paperwork of filing an 11b before requesting a stay of proceedings?

What paperwork is needed?

That isn't clear.

VICTORY IS OURS!!!!!!!!

diehard wrote:

If I understood the above correctly, you don't need to go through the tedious paperwork of filing an 11b before requesting a stay of proceedings?

What paperwork is needed?

That isn't clear.

VICTORY IS OURS!!!!!!!!

They made him wait until all others were gone.

If he went first most of the others would change their plea.

In this case they just drop the charge.

It does help if you have a pile of pic's and you are last in line.

Cheers

Viper1

diehard wrote:

If I understood the above correctly, you don't need to go through the tedious paperwork of filing an 11b before requesting a stay of proceedings?

What paperwork is needed?

That isn't clear.

VICTORY IS OURS!!!!!!!!

Technically speaking you don't require any paperwork, but if the judge is a jerk they'll make you file. It happened to me today in fact. Went in on an 18 month old parking ticket, and not only did they leave me to the very last even though I saw the prosecutor first, when I cited the rules of the court the judge flat out refused. I asked a reason and she wouldn't give one just saying come back with the properly filed paperwork. So since they're going to be *EDIT* about it I'm going to check with the law society about a peer review and filing a complaint against them. Those petty little revenge tactics are total bullshit on their part as all they do is cost the taxpayer more unnecessary money. So now a $15 dollar ticket ends up costing us - taxpayers - several hundred dollars because they want to be *EDIT* and don't like people challenging their authority.