“Disobey Stop Sign - Stop Wrong Place”

Today I got a ticket for "Disobey stop sign - stop wrong place" contrary to the highway traffic act section 136(1) (a)

I did indeed stop at the stop sign that I had "rolled"

At the time, the officer was roughly 150m down the road behind a white suv that she had pull over (thus obstructing her view)

The officer had then followed me down the road to the next stop sign, around the corner, and down two side streets where I had turned left, then pulling me over (approximately 1.3 km after the said stop sign that I allegedly rolled)

The officer then asked me multiple questions about my vehicle (being a corporate car) as well as my driving record and reason for being in Niagara Falls

And claimed that I had rolled a stop sign and stopped to close to another one

The officer went back to her car (for approximately five min before returning)

Once the officer had returned she said that she is going to charge me for rolling the stop sign but let me go with stopping over the line at the other one.

The stop sign that I had "rolled" is set back a fair amount from the corner, making it blind

The stop sign that I had "stopped over the line at" does not have a stop line as it was recently paved

She had said that she had charged me with rolling the stop sign, however the ticked says "stop wrong place"

As well I had a passenger in the car (a witness) and the officer did not check the box as to say there was a witness present at the said time of traffic offence

My question is: is there enough evidence as to that I can take it to trial and get off on the charge, as well as have my passenger testify,

I have never ran a stop sign in my life and I didn't then

All advice is welcome; I have gone to the court house and requested disclosure

Requesting disclosure was a good start.

Stop wrong place is the incorrect charge for a rolling stop, but check the offence location to verify which intersection the officer is talking about. Maybe she decided to charge you for the other alleged offence.

Be familiar with where you're legally required to stop under section 136 of the Highway Traffic Act. You don't stop at the location of the actual sign, verify you did make a lawful stop.

In regards to getting off in Court, there's no guarantee. Certainly you and your witness can attend and present your evidence and it will be up to the Justice of the Peace. The JP will determine the credibility and strength of everyone's testimony and determine if reasonable grounds exist for a conviction.

And in regards to the witness checkbox, that's for impartial witnesses that the Crown may want to call. The officer doesn't check it off for passengers in your vehicle.

i am familiar with section 136 of the Highway Traffic Act as i had stoped at the curb line because at the other alleged offence because there is no painted white line aswell as no cross walk/side walk

I sorry to tell you but you are going to lose. stop sign is the easiest conviction. the officer will testify that she saw you go through the stop sign. you have no defence. unless you can show that the stop sign was not legal. you will get a plea offer to a lesser charge.

Mudpie,

Unless you have vast amount of case law to back up your statement, please do not make it. Stop sign violations can be successfully argued given a proper cross-examination of the officer's testimony and raising of doubt regarding their "unobstructed view". From reading around on CanLii, I found that JP's tend to consider a defence witness more credible if he/she is able to clearly recollect at what part of the intersection they stopped. For example, you had no stop line and proceeded to stop at the curb [as there was no sidewalk]. This is the legal requirement, and having a clear concise recollection of it [confident one at that] will go a long way.

In this case, any evidence of an unmarked stop line [photographic evidence with a date stamped] would help you out.

Good luck!

I'm going to have to side with mnstrcck.

CanLII does provide many cases where people are found not guilty because they had a clear, articulate recollection of the facts. Most JPs are aware that court cases are not a "credibility contest," and that the Supreme Court has said that if a defendant's testimony is believable, they should be believed (part of presumption of innocence). If you can provide an unshakable testimony, the odds are quite in your favour. The problem is, many defendants get up on the witness stand and begin blathering on about how unfair the cops are, it's a cash grab, etc., instead of sticking to the facts... or they just come across as unbelievable.

Okay so I have finally gotten my court date (Feb 4th) as well as my disclosure. The officers field notes are rather straight forward and short, they contest that I rolled a stop sign so she followed me, and watched me stop over the line at another, and then charged me.

I had taken site photos the day after the incident, and as well have created accurate drawings in AutoCAD to accompany those photos, along with the location of where the officer was when I had supposedly rolled the stop sign, and where she pulled me over after following me for 1 km, passed the stop sign that I had supposedly stopped over the line at.

Is there anything else that I should do to help prepare my case?

Right after the incident when I got to work I had wrote down exactly what had happened, planning on fighting the ticket.

thank you for any and all help

dylan.hughes wrote:Okay so I have finally gotten my court date (Feb 4th) as well as my disclosure. The officers field notes are rather straight forward and short, they contest that I rolled a stop sign so she followed me, and watched me stop over the line at another, and then charged me.

I had taken site photos the day after the incident, and as well have created accurate drawings in AutoCAD to accompany those photos, along with the location of where the officer was when I had supposedly rolled the stop sign, and where she pulled me over after following me for 1 km, passed the stop sign that I had supposedly stopped over the line at.

Is there anything else that I should do to help prepare my case?

Right after the incident when I got to work I had wrote down exactly what had happened, planning on fighting the ticket.

thank you for any and all help

That's a lot of work you've prepared, and yet you still haven't articulated much of a defence.

Draw whatever you want- but I don't see how that will convince a JP that you stopped when you might not have. A diagram won't show where you stopped or where you didn't.

The distance between the infraction and the location of the stop is irrelevant.

If it comes down to your word against the officers, and you are both credible, you should win... however, because officers are trained and experienced in gaining convictions in court, the officer's testimony will almost undoubtedly be better (articulate, more descriptive, etc) than yours.

my main reasoning for the drawings is because of where the officer was situated (pulled over on the opposing side of the road behind a white suv) as well because there was three cars between me and the officer at the stop sign that i had supposed stoped in the wrong place at

the officer had to have finished with the person she had pulled over, and make a U-turn inorder to see me stop at the second stop sign.

Given the short distance that this occurred in, I believe that an accurate drawing might help my defense given that the officer had to wait for three cars to pass before she could make the U-turn

given that the incident ocured it march, and my trial is in febuary, would it be worth while to go for an 11b argument as infrigment to be tried with in a reasonable time

would this suit as an alternative given that it is an 11 month wait?

many articles i read online suggest that 11-12 months can successfully be argued as an infringment, how ever the prosess must be started 15 days before the said trial.