Ontario Highway Traffic Act

Discuss the Ontario Highway Traffic Act.


Post Your Traffic Ticket, and Get Help!


The Ontario Traffic Ticket Forum!

       
    

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 
  Print view

Explanation of "Motor Vehicle involved" on ticket
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Jul 20, 2010 9:01 pm 
Offline
Newbie

Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 5:27 pm
Posts: 5
Hey all,

Quick question on reviewing my offence notice. What does the box "Motor vehicle involved" mean? Specifically, the box has been checked.
Probably not a fatal error, right?

Thanks


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 20, 2010 10:02 pm 
Offline
VIP
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 10:20 am
Posts: 978
Motor vehicle involved means whether the defendant was using a motor vehicle to commit the offence. It doesn't refer to other vehicles. So if you got an HTA ticket for speeding or valtag, etc, it would be checked. If you got a trespassing or public intox ticket, it wouldn't be. If it's wrong in either case, it's not a fatal error.

_________________
Former Police Officer, Law Student, and aspiring Criminal Lawyer
http://www.SimonBorys.ca - Bio and Blog

NOTHING I SAY ON HERE IS APPROVED BY ANY POLICE SERVICE, NOR IS IT LEGAL ADVICE.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2010 5:43 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2008 8:26 pm
Posts: 2536
Location: Toronto
Some of the newer Provincial Offences Notices have a "NO" check box beside the "motor vehicle involved" part. On these tickets, the box only gets checked if there was no motor vehicle... for things like what Simon described, like liquor tickets, etc.

_________________
* The above is NOT legal advice. By acting on anything I have said, you assume responsibility for any outcome and consequences. *
http://www.OntarioTicket.com OR http://www.OHTA.ca


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2010 9:44 pm 
Offline
VIP
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 10:20 am
Posts: 978
In the last amendment to the ticket books they changed the Motor Vehicle Involved section. It used to be that you had to choose Y or N, as the case was. Now it's just assumed that a motor vehicle was involved, because that's usually the case, and the box is a "N" for no motor vehicle involved, and you check that off only if no motor vehicle was involved.

That change occurred about 1 year or 2 ago now and none of the old PONs should still be in circulation.

_________________
Former Police Officer, Law Student, and aspiring Criminal Lawyer
http://www.SimonBorys.ca - Bio and Blog

NOTHING I SAY ON HERE IS APPROVED BY ANY POLICE SERVICE, NOR IS IT LEGAL ADVICE.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 24, 2010 1:33 pm 
Offline
Newbie

Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 5:27 pm
Posts: 5
My trial was like a train-wreck.. It got out of my control very quickly. At one point the prosecutor and officer were able to convince the justice that this box "likely" meant that there was no other vehicle involved in the incident.

I was way out of my league, and even though I proved that there was no offence committed, and I requested a motion of non-suit, the justice disagreed (his interpretation he said was not the same as mine), and actually held it against me in his decision that I had requested a motion of non-suit...he actually almost yelled at me when I made the request.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 15, 2010 8:00 pm 
Offline
Jr. Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 5:59 pm
Posts: 63
Location: South Western Ontario
ignite wrote:
My trial was like a train-wreck.. It got out of my control very quickly. At one point the prosecutor and officer were able to convince the justice that this box "likely" meant that there was no other vehicle involved in the incident.

I was way out of my league, and even though I proved that there was no offence committed, and I requested a motion of non-suit, the justice disagreed (his interpretation he said was not the same as mine), and actually held it against me in his decision that I had requested a motion of non-suit...he actually almost yelled at me when I made the request.


Appeal. Some cases the JP doesn't really understand what's happening, this being one of them it seems. Put it before a real Judge. I had a JP yell at me once, but to my defense, the Crown actually piped up and admitted that there was no concrete evidence, only circumstantial evidence of the allegations against me and arguably not prima facie.

_________________
SLYK
-------------
"Bad laws are the worst sort of tyranny." - Edmund Burke"

"Never forget that everything Hitler did in Germany was legal" - MLK Jr.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Related topics
 Topics   Author   Replies   Views   Last post 
There are no new unread posts for this topic. Breathing new life into "guilty with explanation"?

watcher

3

229

Thu Jun 09, 2011 2:39 pm

Simon Borys View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Definition of "traffic" and "Ticket"

canadaguy

5

182

Sat Apr 21, 2012 9:52 am

Radar Identified View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Go to pay ticket online and get "Offence not Found"..??

ren4

4

477

Fri Jun 03, 2011 5:31 pm

Stanton View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Keeping Quiet (" Complete Silence") : Police Traff

[ Go to pageGo to page: 1, 2, 3 ]

nexxen90

32

1479

Mon Mar 15, 2010 12:19 pm

Radar Identified View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Cop did not give charge for BAC above zero "young driver"

12345

2

199

Wed Apr 04, 2012 4:32 pm

12345 View the latest post

 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: