“Multiple Driver Licenses”

Okay so I got arrested for assault on easter my friend got assaulted by one of the cops then he threatened to charge me with mischief and the officer was calling me a retard the entire time needless to say after spending the night in jail I find a ticket in my bag of stuff that I have a summons to appear for possess more than one drivers license. I had 7 in my wallet all this legit and yes I am stupid for not throwing them out but anyway the assault charges got withdrawn but I still have to go to court for this (I dint ask) I did not think it was that big of a deal until I did some research and this is what I came up with.

Section 35 Subsection (1) Clause

(e) apply for, secure or retain in his or her possession more than one drivers licence

here comes the kicker

Offence

(4.1) Every person who contravenes clause (1) (a) is guilty of an offence and on conviction is liable to a fine of .not less than $400 and not more than $50,000 2005, c. 26, Sched. A, s. 3 (2).

MY GOD 50k? What do I do usually I just go in on my own but hell this is quite a bit more then the usual speeding ticket!

There is no set fine, so unfortunately a summons/court date is required. Were all your licences from the same jurisdiction? I.e. your current licence along with past expired ones? I'm under the impression the spirit of the law is to prevent people from using various licences from various jurisdictions or with slight name variations. Unless you were actually using the various licences somehow to your advantage, I imagine you'd be facing the minimum fine.

Stanton wrote:I'm under the impression the spirit of the law is to prevent people from using various licences from various jurisdictions or with slight name variations.

I always thought it applied to licences of the same jurisdiction to encourage people to destroy their old licences, thereby reducing things like identity theft and people altering old DLs to make fake ID's, etc.

Does the "Valid with photo ID only" sticker make any difference in this case? I'm not sure if it can be argued that the sticker voids the plastic so that it is no longer a valid driver's licence - since the sticker is so easily torn off.

Squishy wrote:Does the "Valid with photo ID only" sticker make any difference in this case? I'm not sure if it can be argued that the sticker voids the plastic so that it is no longer a valid driver's licence - since the sticker is so easily torn off.

that is used when the person is waiting for a new photo licence to arrive in mail. Once you received your new licence, you are to destroy the old/expired one.

1 -G1

3 -G2

1 -G

1 -GZ

1- DF Z

All Ontario just kept slipping them in infront of the old one I dont plan on pleading ignorance of course but they do have them as evidence I dont think I can get off with this however can I plead that it was an illegal search because I did not consent to it and they had no evidence to arrest me for th assault charge? My court date is June 28th so I got some time I requested disclosure (Fax) and I have the confirmation page

Edit: Almost forgot I was sitting in booking when he was going through my wallet when he found them he said what are you selling these? I said "no them all being there should be proof enough I am not selling them" The officer did not answer and 8 hours later it was in my bag of belongings with no licenses I do not even have the current one wich is a pain because I cannot reach the officer.. How long will it take for disclosure I sent it today and if I dont have it by my court date can I file a stay because I have not received disclosure??

If you can truly articulate that the officer had no grounds to arrest you, then the search could be deemed unlawful and therefore the evidence would be inadmissible. The officer would not need your consent to search however once you were under arrest. Also keep in mind that if the officer had reasonable grounds to arrest you, the search is still lawful even if you weren't charged with assault. The fact that you were held in custody for 8 hours would also indicate to me alcohol may have been an issue, so the officer may be able to articulate he had other lawful grounds to arrest you, such as intoxication.

Regardless of the circumstances, just be aware that a charter argument can be complicated. If you're serious about fighting the charge I would suggest hiring a paralegal due to the complexity. I would also suggest speaking with the Crown on your first attendance date and see if they're willing to offer any kind of plea deal.

In my experience you pay a paralegal quite alot of money they go in and just cut a deal with the prosecutor because neither of them wanna have a drawn out court case or maybe its just the ones ive used... I have about a month to prepare. I guess I do see how he might have thought I did commit assault however none of that evidence wouldve held up in court anyway and no alcohol was not a factor believe it or not I was completely sober I was actually the designated driver that night

Edit: About why it took so long I dont know I got arrested at 1230 and got out at 830 I hadnt realised I was even in there that long I slept for most of it I guess

I was just pulled over the other day by the same police officer he gave me a ticket for not signing the ownership however I dont think he even took it out of the slip it was in... I think he just wanted to give me a ticket anyway of course Im bringing it to court but I still havent had my court date for my last ticketg.. Im getting so frustrated with this!