OHTA.ca

Hi

hopefully someone can help.....I have a paralegal representing me for a trial on a failure to stop 136(1)(a) coming up in a few days...I contact his secretary who tells me 3 times they have requested disclosure & haven't received it

If my paralegal doesn't have disclosure by the trial date in a few days, will the trial be rescheduled? Is there any chance I could get the ticket dismissed?

This is in Hamilton court and my paralegal just wants me to show up, but I haven't prepared anything and I am at school part time so the paralegal can't say I had to miss work for the trial

The trial must be adjourned if I haven't seen the officers notes, correct?

At trial are you sworn in right away or can my paralegal request adjournment before swearing in

any help would be appreciated

If you hired a paralegal, why aren't they answering those questions? if they won't, or can't answer them, it is time for you to go get a new agent.

AtomGirl wrote:Hi

hopefully someone can help.....I have a paralegal representing me for a trial on a failure to stop 136(1)(a) coming up in a few days...I contact his secretary who tells me 3 times they have requested disclosure & haven't received it

If my paralegal doesn't have disclosure by the trial date in a few days, will the trial be rescheduled? Is there any chance I could get the ticket dismissed?

This is in Hamilton court and my paralegal just wants me to show up, but I haven't prepared anything and I am at school part time so the paralegal can't say I had to miss work for the trial

The trial must be adjourned if I haven't seen the officers notes, correct?

At trial are you sworn in right away or can my paralegal request adjournment before swearing in

any help would be appreciated

found out - paralegal wants to tell the court we are ready for trial & the prosecutor has not provided disclosure despite requesting it 3 times...I guess the paralegal hopes it gets thrown out or adjournment

If you have NOT got disclosure then your paralegal should NOT tell them you are ready for trial. Paralegal should say you are not ready for trial because you have not got disclosure and request an adjournment.

Failure to have disclosure at the first trial is not a reason to get ticket dismissed. Yes it should get adjourned to new date.

You might want to give explicit instructions to your paralegal. Something like this will protect you from them doing something you don't want them to do. Send them email and letter that says:

(1) Do not plead guilty to anything without consulting me first.

(2) Do not accpet a plea deal without consulting me first.

(3) Do not proceed to trial without reviewing disclosure with me first.

And here are some thoughts I have posted before about hiring a paralegal or lawyer:

Points to conisder:

- Do not hire any paralegal/lawyer that suggests they can win without seeing the disclosure first.

- Only hire a paralegal/lawyer that will review the disclosure with you and suggest possible defenses to try and fight it.

- Do not hire any paralegal/lawyer that considers "negotiating a plea deal" a win. Although a plea deal might be the best choice for you, some paralegals do not try to fight at all and will only negotiate plea deals and then they say they "won".

- Do not hire any paralegal/lawyer that "gurantees a win or you don't pay" as this is illegal in Ontario.

jsherk is absolutely right. How on earth can you be ready for trial when you don't know the evidence against you ? That's nonsense.

I'm thinking the OP means that her paralegal wants to show the Court that they would have been ready to proceed to trial HAD the Crown provided disclosure. It's a common tactic, show up with your client and claim hardship over the delays caused by the Crown. It arguably adds a bit of theatrics that can sometimes held convince a JP to dismiss instead of adjourn.

first of all, I just want to say thanks guys for responding, but I am only 24 and never been to court before...

I actually wasn't even sure I needed to show up at court since I had a paralegal but the paralegal says I should be there because I can loose the case if I am not present....He is planning on meeting with the prosecutor to see if a deal can be reached and also find out if the officer is present...He wants to say to the JP that we are ready for trial and haven't received disclosure, see if that can get a dismissal.

Does it mean that because the officer is not present at the time the paralegal speaks with the prosecutor that the officer will not be there at the time the trial starts?

My paralegal says sometimes the JP in Hamilton will get the disclosure and give it to you that same day as the trial and give you time to view it and still face trial that same day.

What are the reasons why a prosecutor will not provide disclosure to a paralegal despite being asked for it 3 times? is the prosecutor up to something or is it the officer who has bad notes or lost the notes?

Does section 136(1)(a) mean I am charged with only NOT stopping at a stop sign or does it mean I am charged with not stopping AND not proceeding with caution?

This is my story - It was a 3 way stop. I approached the stop sign slowing down and noticed the police car sitting on the street perpendicular to me. I did stop - maybe not for 3 seconds - maybe a fraction of a second but I did come to a stop and I did not go into the intersection. As soon I as accelerated and drove up the street the cop pulled me over and told me to turn off at the next side street. I don't believe the cop even told me why he stopped me. I think I was curious that I had to ask the cop did i miss the stop sign because i wasn't sure why he pulled me over and the stop sign was the last place I came from.... he just said "I wouldn't have pulled you over but you came out of there at 25km/h and there are children in the area".

First of all it was in the afternoon and there was no children around. Second, is the cop admitting my stopping wasn't the problem but the proceeding with caution?

The cop had no video or radar so I don't know how he knew that speed. The cop asked me for the drivers license, insurance, registration. I could only provide drivers licence. It was not my car I was driving but my parents so i wasn't sure where they were. The cop came back to my car and told me he could have given me 2 other tickets but is just giving me the failure to stop ticket. I asked how i pay for the ticket and the cop said the options are on the back. That's basically it. Other than that the cop was a young guy around mid 20s...even the paralegals I spoke to did not recognize is name

Should I mention that the cop's statement was that he wouldn't have pulled me over but...... meaning that is a statement that could be attacked? Could it be interpreted as the cop thought my STOPPING was fine but I didnt proceed with caution & because I am NOT being charged with proceeding with caution that there was no problem with the STOP and the case should be dismissed?

Any advice on what I should say? I don't want to lie but I also don't want to incriminate myself either...from my story what would you say and not say? how elaborate should i go? Would you bring up the officer's statement to me and leave out my statements? leave out that I did not have insurance or registration? (I am not being charged with that though), should my story be that I stopped maybe not 3 seconds but I did stop...how far would you go with the story..I assume the prosecutor gets to cross examine me

I haven't really had any time with the paralegal to go over the case other than he says it is my word vs the officer's and when we get to trial he will try negotiating and if we go before the JP plead the improper disclosure for an adjournment. He just says tell them your story of what happened and he will be there to object to reaching questions by prosecutor....He also told me there is a 33% of dismissal, 33% chance of adjournment, 33% chance of a by law ticket...when a deal is presented I read most people plead to the deal but I am not sure what I will do....he tells me i don't need to bring anything to court

is there even a by law for a failure to stop ticket? how can I find out for sure? Is a BY LAW ticket like a parking ticket, which doesn't affect driving record or insurance?

I heard of a disobey sign with 2 demerit points but I told my paralegal I hope to get it removed from driving record and/or insurance, so a win for me is DISMISSAL, ADJOURNMENT (the adjournment will their fault not mine), BY LAW ticket

Does anyone have experience with Hamilton traffic court? My paralegal just says it comes down what prosecutor and JP you get...some JPs may give you disclosure the day of the trial and let you see it that day and still proceed with the trial that day

is it possible to ask for a stay of trial since it is the first attendance? or is it most likely an adjournment if I don't accept any deals

would you accept a deal offered by the prosecutor? Most people would just to have it over with I guess...If I get offered a by law ticket it will be hard to say NO to that deal...I would love a dismissal but I am sure the prosecutor wants a conviction of some sort & some money & the paralegal wants to move on to his next client

This is not a complex trial (my word vs officers) but it has taken 8 or 9 months to go to trial...paralegal says they have up to 18 months

I only have 1 other ticket speeding 15 over & that is all

thank you very much everyone

I am not a lawyer and am not a paralegal and the folloing is not legal advice and is just my opinion, but I do not think the paralegal you hired is very experienced.

You do NOT have to show up to trial for provincial offences as long as you send somebody to represent you.

But I see that the paralegal wants you there in order to try and say "we are ready to go to trial". But this is a very very bad idea because you have not seen the disclosure yet, and in theory you are saying "we are ready to go to trial without seeing the disclosure". The courts have decided that the lack of disclosure by first trial should be solved by setting new trial date and telling prosecutor to get the disclosure for you. My opinion is that the chance of it getting dropped becaue you are ready to proceed and they did not get you disclosure yet is about slim to none. Chance of an adjournment should be 99.9%.

If you get the disclosure that same day of trial then you should get an adjounrment because you can argue that you can not possibly prepare a defense the same day you received the disclosure. If the JP makes you have a trial the same day, then that is a GREAT way to win on an appeal.

Prosecutors MAY offer deals, but do not have to. So there is a chance they might offer you the bylaw ticket, but there is also a chance they won't. And does a bylaw ticket affect your insurance? I do not know the answer to that... you would have to ask your insurance company. If it will NOT affect your insurance then it is worth consideration. But if it will affect your insurance then it is useless. If bylaw ticket is a 2 demerit point ticket then that means it will show up on your driving record and will most likely affect your insurance.

My suggestions:

- If you paid the paralegal then you do not need to be there unless you want to go and have nothing better to do.

- Tell paralegal, in writing, Do not plead guilty to anything without consulting me first.

- Tell paralegal, in wriing, Do not accept a plea deal without consulting me first.

- Tell paralegal, in writing, Do not proceed to trial without reviewing disclosure with me first.

- Tell paralegal, in writing, Ask for an adjournment because of lack of dislcosure and not enough time to review it and prepare a defense.

Again, I am not a lawyer or a paralegal and this is not legal advice, but personally I would not hire your paralegal.