I got a ticket for 'Disobey Stop Sign' in November of 2013 (in York Region), requested disclosure and went to court in August of 2014. At my first appearance, I did not plea but requested an ajournment to to consult legal advice. The JOP set the next appearance in September. I contacted a paralegal about my options. He told me that on my next appearance, if the police officer did not show, the charges would be withdrawn (he didn't encourage me to choose that option, merely informed me of the possibility). However, on my next court appearance in September, I went to the prosecutor and said I was pleading 'not guilty' (the officer was not present in court), and instead the JOP schedule a trial date several months from now. I am confused now. Did I miss something? My second question is if, at this stage, it's still possible to contact the prosecutor's office or the court before the trial, and attempt to plea to a lesser charge (thus forgo the trial appearance). It's not that I don't want to fight it, but it's dragging on longer than I may be able afford to deal with (taking time off work to go to court, etc.). Thanks.
I got a ticket for 'Disobey Stop Sign' in November of 2013 (in York Region), requested disclosure and went to court in August of 2014. At my first appearance, I did not plea but requested an ajournment to to consult legal advice. The JOP set the next appearance in September.
I contacted a paralegal about my options. He told me that on my next appearance, if the police officer did not show, the charges would be withdrawn (he didn't encourage me to choose that option, merely informed me of the possibility).
However, on my next court appearance in September, I went to the prosecutor and said I was pleading 'not guilty' (the officer was not present in court), and instead the JOP schedule a trial date several months from now.
I am confused now. Did I miss something?
My second question is if, at this stage, it's still possible to contact the prosecutor's office or the court before the trial, and attempt to plea to a lesser charge (thus forgo the trial appearance). It's not that I don't want to fight it, but it's dragging on longer than I may be able afford to deal with (taking time off work to go to court, etc.).
Rough Timeline Received Ticket: Nov 2013 1st Trial: Aug 2014 2nd Trial: Sep 2014 3rd Trial: ???? You're at-fault for the time between the 2nd and 1st trial. But the rest is the crown's fault. I would consider an 11b application. Prosecutor will always plea-bargain in order to avoid a lengthy trial.
Rough Timeline
Received Ticket: Nov 2013
1st Trial: Aug 2014
2nd Trial: Sep 2014
3rd Trial: ????
You're at-fault for the time between the 2nd and 1st trial. But the rest is the crown's fault. I would consider an 11b application.
Prosecutor will always plea-bargain in order to avoid a lengthy trial.
Hi iFly55, Next court appearance is in December. I am thinking an 11b might be a hard sell considering I was the one who requested the adjournment in August. I am just totally confused because it looks like it doesn't matter whether the police officer shows up even for your first appearance? If the outcome of pleading not guilty on your first appearance means they simply schedule a date for your trial (and the officer can show up then)?
iFly55 wrote:
Rough Timeline
Received Ticket: Nov 2013
1st Trial: Aug 2014
2nd Trial: Sep 2014
3rd Trial: ????
You're at-fault for the time between the 2nd and 1st trial. But the rest is the crown's fault. I would consider an 11b application.
Prosecutor will always plea-bargain in order to avoid a lengthy trial.
Hi iFly55,
Next court appearance is in December. I am thinking an 11b might be a hard sell considering I was the one who requested the adjournment in August. I am just totally confused because it looks like it doesn't matter whether the police officer shows up even for your first appearance? If the outcome of pleading not guilty on your first appearance means they simply schedule a date for your trial (and the officer can show up then)?
Your adjournment only accounts for a one month delay. I don't think you understand how 11b time calculations are done, you should review R. v. Andrade: http://www.canlii.org/en/on/oncj/doc/20 ... cj470.html From what you described the officer has another opportunity to appear for your next trial. Just like how you requested an adjournment to seek legal counsel, the prosecutor can request an adjournment so their witness (officer) can be present. It works both-ways. In busier jurisdictions, the prosecutor will withdraw the charge if the officer isn't present. In other places, they're happy to schedule another date and give the officer an opportunity to testify.
From what you described the officer has another opportunity to appear for your next trial. Just like how you requested an adjournment to seek legal counsel, the prosecutor can request an adjournment so their witness (officer) can be present. It works both-ways.
In busier jurisdictions, the prosecutor will withdraw the charge if the officer isn't present. In other places, they're happy to schedule another date and give the officer an opportunity to testify.
Thanks for that link and explanation iFly55! I am surprising to see that the 11(b) worked in this case (11 months), as I thought the standard was usually a year or more (for delays due to the Crown). I've reading up on the 'how to file 11(b)' threads, that looks like a ton of work as well. Eh..
From what you described the officer has another opportunity to appear for your next trial. Just like how you requested an adjournment to seek legal counsel, the prosecutor can request an adjournment so their witness (officer) can be present. It works both-ways.
In busier jurisdictions, the prosecutor will withdraw the charge if the officer isn't present. In other places, they're happy to schedule another date and give the officer an opportunity to testify.
Thanks for that link and explanation iFly55! I am surprising to see that the 11(b) worked in this case (11 months), as I thought the standard was usually a year or more (for delays due to the Crown). I've reading up on the 'how to file 11(b)' threads, that looks like a ton of work as well. Eh..
But very, very, very satisfying if you succeed! One of the hardest things you will ever do is to keep the smile off your face when the justice of the peace stays the charge and you walk out of the courtroom past the prosecutor :lol: :lol: :lol:
zopiclone wrote:
Thanks for that link and explanation iFly55! I am surprising to see that the 11(b) worked in this case (11 months), as I thought the standard was usually a year or more (for delays due to the Crown). I've reading up on the 'how to file 11(b)' threads, that looks like a ton of work as well. Eh..
But very, very, very satisfying if you succeed! One of the hardest things you will ever do is to keep the smile off your face when the justice of the peace stays the charge and you walk out of the courtroom past the prosecutor
So I was reading all the threads about how to file an 11(b), and saw that I should request transcripts (in my case, for the first appearance when I requested an adjournment and the second appearance when the prosecutor requested an adjournment). So I was trying to figure out where I would have to go to request my transcripts and found this... http://www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.c ... cripts.asp Am I understanding this correctly? They've outsourced transcript requests to "independent, authorized court transcriptionist" and I would have to pay the crazy fees to obtain the transcripts to go along with my 11(b) application?
So I was reading all the threads about how to file an 11(b), and saw that I should request transcripts (in my case, for the first appearance when I requested an adjournment and the second appearance when the prosecutor requested an adjournment). So I was trying to figure out where I would have to go to request my transcripts and found this...
Am I understanding this correctly? They've outsourced transcript requests to "independent, authorized court transcriptionist" and I would have to pay the crazy fees to obtain the transcripts to go along with my 11(b) application?
Forget that link, just go to the ticket office where you filed your ticket for trial; they will take your transcript request. The costs depends on how much was actually said during the adjournment; if it was a few minutes than you're going to spend less than $20 for three copies.
Forget that link, just go to the ticket office where you filed your ticket for trial; they will take your transcript request. The costs depends on how much was actually said during the adjournment; if it was a few minutes than you're going to spend less than $20 for three copies.
You certainly can try your luck with an 11b application, just don't expect to win. Many people don't really understand this remedy and waste their time applying and even worse, telling others to apply. They simply look at the Andrade decision and think that's the law (several decisions have been decided since then!). Plus, they don't understand the complex arguments involved----its not just math! To succeed, you have to prove that you were READY for trial but couldn't proceed because of the Crown's delays and you were prejudiced because of it. It doesn't appear to apply in your case---after all, you were STILL asking for disclosure in August 2014! You therefore can't argue from one side of your mouth that you still needed disclosure and consult with a legal representative (which means you weren't ready to proceed to trial!) AND that you were also ready for trial----which was it? Remember, there are transcripts for these things so be careful not to perjure yourself. Your Aug 2014 date was likely a trial date but YOU were the one who couldn't proceed because YOU asked for the adjournment. Your September date was just a 'set date'----to schedule a trial (whereby the officer does not need to attend!)---it was likely NOT another trial date!!! I highly doubt they would have given you another trial date within 1 month. Check that out and you'll likely see I'm correct. Once again, section 11b remedies are for unreasonable delays not attributed to you. I therefore wouldn't waste my time with such nonsense--any prosecutor worth their weight will easily shoot down your arguments and even if the JP gets the law wrong, an appeal court will likely rule re-open the case so you'd be back to square one. Instead, be prepared to proceed to trial on your next trial date.
You certainly can try your luck with an 11b application, just don't expect to win. Many people don't really understand this remedy and waste their time applying and even worse, telling others to apply. They simply look at the Andrade decision and think that's the law (several decisions have been decided since then!). Plus, they don't understand the complex arguments involved----its not just math!
To succeed, you have to prove that you were READY for trial but couldn't proceed because of the Crown's delays and you were prejudiced because of it. It doesn't appear to apply in your case---after all, you were STILL asking for disclosure in August 2014! You therefore can't argue from one side of your mouth that you still needed disclosure and consult with a legal representative (which means you weren't ready to proceed to trial!) AND that you were also ready for trial----which was it? Remember, there are transcripts for these things so be careful not to perjure yourself.
Your Aug 2014 date was likely a trial date but YOU were the one who couldn't proceed because YOU asked for the adjournment. Your September date was just a 'set date'----to schedule a trial (whereby the officer does not need to attend!)---it was likely NOT another trial date!!! I highly doubt they would have given you another trial date within 1 month. Check that out and you'll likely see I'm correct.
Once again, section 11b remedies are for unreasonable delays not attributed to you. I therefore wouldn't waste my time with such nonsense--any prosecutor worth their weight will easily shoot down your arguments and even if the JP gets the law wrong, an appeal court will likely rule re-open the case so you'd be back to square one.
Instead, be prepared to proceed to trial on your next trial date.
Actually, I didn't request disclosure on my first appearance in August. I requested disclosure beforehand (3 times) and finally received a call to pick it up and sign for it 3 weeks before the August appearance. But yes, I did request an adjournment in my first appearance in August to consult legal counsel, and the JOP scheduled the next appearance for September--this is the part that I indicated in my original post that I was confused about. As mentioned, I did contact a paralegal for advice over the phone. When I specifically asked "...if the police officer does not show on my next appearance, does that mean my ticket will be withdrawn?" The paralegal's answer was "yes." But it didn't happen on my second appearance in September. Instead, they set a trial date for December. I know I am responsible for the 1 month delay resulting for my request for an adjournment from August - September, this is why I indicated in my original post that I didn't think I'd have a case for filing an 11(b). I always thought the 'magic number' was 13 months. But in R. v. Andrade, the judge stayed the proceedings even though the total delay time was 11 months (I think the 3 months delay between September and December for my next appearance constitutes "institutional delay"?) I did do some quick calculations, and I think in my case, I might fall literally just a few days short of 11 months (my next appearance is in - very early - December). I know that even 11 months delay 11(b) might be a hard-sell, but you are saying it won't work at all? I am really confused :/
highwaystar wrote:
To succeed, you have to prove that you were READY for trial but couldn't proceed because of the Crown's delays and you were prejudiced because of it. It doesn't appear to apply in your case---after all, you were STILL asking for disclosure in August 2014! You therefore can't argue from one side of your mouth that you still needed disclosure and consult with a legal representative (which means you weren't ready to proceed to trial!) AND that you were also ready for trial----which was it? Remember, there are transcripts for these things so be careful not to perjure yourself.
Your Aug 2014 date was likely a trial date but YOU were the one who couldn't proceed because YOU asked for the adjournment. Your September date was just a 'set date'----to schedule a trial (whereby the officer does not need to attend!)---it was likely NOT another trial date!!! I highly doubt they would have given you another trial date within 1 month. Check that out and you'll likely see I'm correct.
Actually, I didn't request disclosure on my first appearance in August. I requested disclosure beforehand (3 times) and finally received a call to pick it up and sign for it 3 weeks before the August appearance. But yes, I did request an adjournment in my first appearance in August to consult legal counsel, and the JOP scheduled the next appearance for September--this is the part that I indicated in my original post that I was confused about.
As mentioned, I did contact a paralegal for advice over the phone. When I specifically asked "...if the police officer does not show on my next appearance, does that mean my ticket will be withdrawn?" The paralegal's answer was "yes." But it didn't happen on my second appearance in September. Instead, they set a trial date for December.
I know I am responsible for the 1 month delay resulting for my request for an adjournment from August - September, this is why I indicated in my original post that I didn't think I'd have a case for filing an 11(b). I always thought the 'magic number' was 13 months. But in R. v. Andrade, the judge stayed the proceedings even though the total delay time was 11 months (I think the 3 months delay between September and December for my next appearance constitutes "institutional delay"?)
I did do some quick calculations, and I think in my case, I might fall literally just a few days short of 11 months (my next appearance is in - very early - December). I know that even 11 months delay 11(b) might be a hard-sell, but you are saying it won't work at all? I am really confused :/
I'm not saying don't try----after all, you COULD very well succeed with your argument. I personally wouldn't waste my time, given all the effort involved and the odds of success. However, if you've got the time and patience (or just want to use this experience to educate yourself on these things), then go ahead. Just be ready to argue the math surrounding the delay and why a stay is the appropriate remedy (i.e. the prejudice to your case). The prejudice component might be the difficult one to really meet in your case. Plus, don't just go in there with the Andrade decision---update yourself on the law since that case. I simply mentioned the 11b issues because you stated that the case was dragging on more than you might be able to afford---hence, why you wanted to plea bargain. Going the 11b route is going to take time and effort on your part. If you had a very solid 11b case then it would absolutely be worth it. However, it really is a 50/50 (at best). So, if you do a cost-benefit analysis, it is probably cheaper to just focus in on a defence for your case and/or consider a plea bargain. After all, chances are good that if you file an 11b application and lose, the prosecutor is less likely to give you a good plea deal. Again, that's just my take on it----every person has a different perspective and neither is wrong. As long as you go in with eyes wide open and are aware of the consequences, its your decision to make. Regardless, best of luck with your case.
I'm not saying don't try----after all, you COULD very well succeed with your argument. I personally wouldn't waste my time, given all the effort involved and the odds of success. However, if you've got the time and patience (or just want to use this experience to educate yourself on these things), then go ahead. Just be ready to argue the math surrounding the delay and why a stay is the appropriate remedy (i.e. the prejudice to your case). The prejudice component might be the difficult one to really meet in your case. Plus, don't just go in there with the Andrade decision---update yourself on the law since that case.
I simply mentioned the 11b issues because you stated that the case was dragging on more than you might be able to afford---hence, why you wanted to plea bargain. Going the 11b route is going to take time and effort on your part. If you had a very solid 11b case then it would absolutely be worth it. However, it really is a 50/50 (at best). So, if you do a cost-benefit analysis, it is probably cheaper to just focus in on a defence for your case and/or consider a plea bargain. After all, chances are good that if you file an 11b application and lose, the prosecutor is less likely to give you a good plea deal. Again, that's just my take on it----every person has a different perspective and neither is wrong. As long as you go in with eyes wide open and are aware of the consequences, its your decision to make. Regardless, best of luck with your case.
Ah ok, I get you. Thanks for the clarification. The plea deal I would be looking at for this jurisdiction (the one offered to all the people who had the same charge on my first and second appearance) is 2 demerits and reduction of fine to something like $60. To me that is virtually meaningless as a 'lesser plea' for a 3 demerit and $110 or so offence. So yeah, I am tired of this whole thing and it's seriously cutting into my schedule (more so if I have to take at least an entire afternoon off to do the whole 11(b) thing at the courthouse), but I feel they are not leaving me much choice. But really appreciate your caution.
Ah ok, I get you. Thanks for the clarification.
The plea deal I would be looking at for this jurisdiction (the one offered to all the people who had the same charge on my first and second appearance) is 2 demerits and reduction of fine to something like $60. To me that is virtually meaningless as a 'lesser plea' for a 3 demerit and $110 or so offence. So yeah, I am tired of this whole thing and it's seriously cutting into my schedule (more so if I have to take at least an entire afternoon off to do the whole 11(b) thing at the courthouse), but I feel they are not leaving me much choice. But really appreciate your caution.
Here's an 11b success story where they only had a 7mnth delay: http://www.ontariohighwaytrafficact.com ... tml#p21984 highwaystar does have good advice here, it's not just about the time delay you also have to show how the delay has prejudiced you: sleep deprivation, problems at work/school, always thinking about it, frowned upon at work for requesting numerous days off in relation to the matter, concerned family members wondering why you're always at the court house... distrust, that maybe you were charged with something more serious. I'm merely just thinking out loud here... Most prosecutors will accept your 11b as long as your delay is within the guidelines; if they disagree who's responsible for the delay, then that's when you'll have to go through the pre-trial motion and convince the JP. Most JPs focus solely on the time delay, and they accept inferences of prejudice and don't even require you to swear under oath. highwaystar is correct there are a number of decisions since Andrade: https://www.canlii.org/en/on/#search/ty ... de%20delay Perusing through the relevant cases, they appear to be positive and pro-defendant. It'll be in your best interest to go through them.
highwaystar does have good advice here, it's not just about the time delay you also have to show how the delay has prejudiced you: sleep deprivation, problems at work/school, always thinking about it, frowned upon at work for requesting numerous days off in relation to the matter, concerned family members wondering why you're always at the court house... distrust, that maybe you were charged with something more serious. I'm merely just thinking out loud here...
Most prosecutors will accept your 11b as long as your delay is within the guidelines; if they disagree who's responsible for the delay, then that's when you'll have to go through the pre-trial motion and convince the JP.
Most JPs focus solely on the time delay, and they accept inferences of prejudice and don't even require you to swear under oath.
Thanks so much for the link to the cases iFly55. Quick question: an I correct to assume the decisions from the human rights and labour tribunals are not binding, but merely 'persuasive' (at best), since they are not decisions from higher courts? In fact, how do I 'rank' the court decisions in relation to 'traffic court'? Superior Court of Justice Court of Appeal for Ontario Ontario Court of Justice <-- trials for HTA offences fall here, i.e. me? Is this correct?
Thanks so much for the link to the cases iFly55. Quick question: an I correct to assume the decisions from the human rights and labour tribunals are not binding, but merely 'persuasive' (at best), since they are not decisions from higher courts? In fact, how do I 'rank' the court decisions in relation to 'traffic court'?
Superior Court of Justice
Court of Appeal for Ontario
Ontario Court of Justice <-- trials for HTA offences fall here, i.e. me?
Ignore the Civil, Commercial, Human Rights cases, look for decisions like R. v. Jair, 2013 ONCJ 142 (CanLII): http://canlii.ca/t/fwnhp R. v. Szewczyk, 2012 ONCJ 680 (CanLII): http://canlii.ca/t/ftlss Make sure they discuss 11b and R. v. Andrade Cases that are binding will be any decision made at a court higher than the regular trial (JP); so if the decision is written by a justice/judge then it's binding to your trial court. Even JP decisions are persuasive depending on who wrote it and how well written it is. Sister/Brother JPs have to provide explanations/reasons as to why they disagree.
Ignore the Civil, Commercial, Human Rights cases, look for decisions like
Cases that are binding will be any decision made at a court higher than the regular trial (JP); so if the decision is written by a justice/judge then it's binding to your trial court. Even JP decisions are persuasive depending on who wrote it and how well written it is. Sister/Brother JPs have to provide explanations/reasons as to why they disagree.
I have a problem and not sure what the hell to do about it. Few days ago I was stopped on a street going westbound against blinding afternoon sun following the flow of traffic. I drive a taxi for living in Toronto and have ACZ driver's license. I have a perfect record both for professional as well regular demerit points. I haven't been pulled over as a matter of fact in some 15 years for…
I have recently gone to court for a speeding ticket issued by an OPP officer. As it stood, the officer forgot to sign the ticket. So at my trial, before I made a plea, I pointed this out to the justice of the peace and asked that the ticket be quashed. I was asked to produce my copy of the ticket, which I gave and the JOP then agreed with me and dismissed the case. Before he did so, the…
I got pulled over (along with about 10 other cars) for going through a road closed sign. I had just pulled out of a parking lot pretty much right beside the road closed sign, and with about 4 cars behind me there wasn't much I could do but go through, so I think I have a good chance of fighting it. However, on my ticket under the Signature of issuing Provincial Offences Officer, it's left…
So here's my situation, any advice would be appreciated.
On June 26, 2013 I received a ticket for 25 over in a 60 zone
In early October I received my notice of trial (Feb 25, 2014)
In early January I sent in my request for disclosure
In late January I received a letter to pick up my disclosure, however when I picked up my disclosure it wasn't typed (I had requested it to be) and I needed…
Is there a legal requirement to report an accident to the insurer?
Scenario
- 2 vehicle accident
- each vehicle has less than $1000 damage
- each vehicle has damage roughly equal to insurance deductible
- a police Accident Report was completed
In this scenario the drivers decided to repair their own damages. But are they legally bound to report the accident and damages to the insurer? ...and out of…
I will be representing my wife at her speeding trial next week. Mostly everything is pretty much run of the mill but since she wasn't speeding we will be having her take the stand. Since this opens up the opportunity for the prosecutor to cross examine, I am just wondering if anyone here knows what kind of questions we should expect from the prosecutor in order to best prepare.
i got pulled over by a cop this morning in my kids's school zone for failure to stop at a stop sign. i am thinking of fighting this ticket, but i noticed that on the ticket itself it only says "disobey stop sign - fail to stop" and there is no mention of the demerit points. a co-worker mentioned to me that a ticket should state how many demerit points i am being docked. i know the Highway Traffic…
Alright, so this happened back awhile ago on June and I haven't appeared in Court. However, I would like some inputs and advice before I get into this battle.
Back in June I got a Speeding Ticket claiming I was going 100km/h on Blackcreek going south towards Lawrence. The Speed Limit there is 70km/h.
At this point of time, it was roughly traffic hour around 4-5PM. Coming off of the Highway, and…
Ive already done searches, read the act as best i can but still haven't read a complete answer. Where in the HTA does it state that the front license plate must be attached to the front bumper? I have it on the passenger sun visor (if ppl remember the old temp permits that taped to the pass side of windshield) i figured that this spot would be the same. However now they have got rid of…
My son was returning from school and was just entering the driveway when another vehicle hit the rear end. Police writes a ticket "fail to yield from private drive" 139(i). He is going to fight this ticket and made an application for disclosure. The trial is next week and he still hasn't received the disclosure.
He checked with the court last month and they said that they will call when disclosure…
i was travelling on the 401 (posted speed 100km/h) in the far left lane, when i caught up to a vehicle going ~110km/h. I patiently waited for the vehicle to move over a lane, but they did not. The vehicle behind me moved to the center lane to pass, but because he was a safe distance behind me, i moved into the middle lane ahead of him to pass the slower moving car. When I accelerated, i…
So I was returning from my honeymoon in Montreal, and was cruising down the 401 just inside the Ontario/Quebec border. I was passing one of the Onroute stations and saw an OPP cruiser. I checked my speed and I was doing 120. A few kilometers up the road the cruiser pulled me over and told me I was clocked doing 132 by the aircraft. I was a little surprised to see the ticket was for the full…
I made a right turn during prohibited hours (7am-6pm) in Toronto. I was ticketed by a COP who was specially watching for that trap.
After I've received the ticket HTA144(9), I discovered one of the seven digits of my license plate was incorrectly written on my ticket. I was thinking about to make a First Attendance at the court office to see the prosecutor for a reduced charge...any advice or…
Have been busy and haven't had much time to follow up on this...
Went to court having not received disclosure (and was not organized enough to apply for a stay), so the trial was adjourned. They photocopied the officer's ticket and notes and provided a log sheet from the plane. I've sent another request for the rest of the disclosure items.
So here's my question -- can an officer amend the ticket…
I am not sure if my case is really a case of " mis-use parking permit" and need some advises on whether i should fight the ticket. Here is what happened:
During the labor day long weekend, I took my parents to diner at a local shopping mall. (my father's hip was broken in 2016 and he's been on wheelchair since, the permit is in his name and I been using the permit to help him for doctor's…
I have a court date coming up where I need to subpoena one of the officers that was present when I got my ticket. The issuing officer didn't include the fact that the second one was present at the time in his report (disclosure) but did give me the second officers name and badge number after the judge told him to do it.
What I'm looking for help with is the process of me getting to…
I got pulled over on a 4 lane section fo Highway 7... Thank god I didn't get a stay at home ticket as well or my car impounded.
Officer clocked me at 156 km/h he decided not to impound my car and give me a 149 km/h since it was my first offence and he said I was polite and respectful. I would give this officer a 5/5 review if I could, very polite and respectful.
Long story short, I was driving from Toronto to Ottawa and around Napanee with my friend in two separated cars, the officer was parked on uturn. He followed us turn his light on and got between us and pulled us over, he told me that i was running at 152 km/h without showing me his LISAR. they suspended my and my friends license and impounded the two cars for 7 days. This was a Friday in January…
I'm unsure on what to do here. I was under the impression that I could request a stay on the day of trial because disclosure was not given to me in an adequate time. I requested disclosure 2x by fax, 5 months ago.
I read on ticketcombat that I had to file a motion 15 days prior to the trial to request a stay of proceedings.
Does anyone else get blinded by fog lights on rural roads? I don't seem to have a problem with them on lighted streets, but the badly aimed fog lights or ones with a poor cutoff really get to me when driving the Escort. I just came back from a 20-minute drive, and every single pickup truck had fog lights on, and forced me to focus on the bottom right of the road. My windshield is clean and…
