The other night I was turning from a neighborhood road onto a relatively major street late at night. There was no traffic on any street. About a mile up the road I was pulled over when I turned into a gas station. I was told thatI did not completely stop before turning right on red which I did not agree with but that is besides the point. When getting the ticket I was charged under section 144(19) for failing to yield.

Despite subsection ( 18 ) and subject to subsection (14), a driver, after stopping his or her vehicle and yielding the right of way to traffic lawfully approaching so closely that to proceed would constitute an immediate hazard, may,

(a) turn to the right; or

(b) turn to the left from a one-way street into a one-way street,

without a green indication being shown. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 144 (19).


My interpretation of this is that the office claims by this charge my failure to yield caused a hazard which is not the case. Does it seem as if I have a case due to being charged incorrectly?

The key point in there is the "failure to stop" part of it. There may have been no traffic at all, and it may have been perfectly safe to make the right turn without coming to a full stop - but - it is illegal. Even in that situation, legally, you're required to bring the vehicle to a complete stop before turning. So no, unfortunately, you were not charged incorrectly if the officer believes that you did not stop completely.



Forward motion of the vehicle must cease completely.

Where was the officer when you made the turn? Was he behind you, approaching from another direction...?

I honestly did not see where the officer was at all. He pulled me over far up the road when i pulled into a gas station and questioned me thoroughly. The issue I was wondering is that he did not charge me with failure to stop but fo failure to yield. my understanding of the section was that this applies if I had stopped then dangerously pulled out in front of someone. Am I wrong in this interpretation

if you don't know where the officer was...maybe you pulled out in front of the cruiser and hit had to change lanes or something?

Ask for disclosure and it will give you more insight, rather than you and others on here trying to answer if the offence applies without all the details

_________________
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca

I know I did not pull out in front of the cop. What do you mean by diclosure?

Disclosure is where you get all of the relevant evidence against you so that you can answer the charge and provide a full defence to it. So the Crown is "disclosing" all of its evidence to you... actually to be technical... it is all of the evidence that has a reasonable possibility of affecting the outcome of the trial.

In this case, when the officer stopped you, he would have made notes about the incident. You should get a copy of his notes and a photocopy of the front and back of the ticket in this case. The notes should tell you (probably in point form) what he observed, where the offence occurred, that he followed you to the gas station without losing sight of your vehicle, and then stopped and charged you, etc. It is what he observed that is critical - did he see you not stop, or did he see you pull out in front of another vehicle?

Take a look at this website for more information, including stuff about disclosure:

www.ticketcombat.com

Is there any other way to word the charge on the ticket for that section? POA Reg. 950 only lists the 'fail to yield' wording. An alternative is 'red light - fail to stop' but I think 144 (19) also fits, despite the wording on the ticket.

_________________