New options on back of tickets

A few recent posts had me confused about the options you can pick on the back of tickets. Looks like there have been some changes made as of March 31st, 2012.

Option 1 - Plea of Guilty

Option 2 – Early Resolution (Meeting with Prosecutor)

Option 3 – Trial Option

So it looks like Option 2 no longer locks you into a guilty plea and allows for the pre trial resolution.

Just though I'd share as an FYI.

If you choose Option 2 now and then decide to go to trial after speaking with the prosecutor, does this mean the clock for an 11B filing would start from the day you have your early resolution meeting instead of from when you were actually charged?

from my experience through 11b pre-trial motion, was that neither the date you were charged nor the early resolution meeting was when the clock starts

the JP at my trial ruled it's the day you filed your tickets at the sardine office, and expressed your intent to fight the charges

the first attendance was ruled to be merely part of the trial process, and it was your intent to have a speedy/early resolution to save the court's time

however it's something you'll have to argue at trial, i'm not sure if there is case-law regarding how the 11b clock works w.r.t. early resolution meetings

in Toronto do you have to specifically request a first attendance with the prosecutor? When I received my court date there was no mention of it. I have already faxed the prosectuor for disclosure but I would like a first attendance to see if I can get an early resolution. Do I just fax the prosecutor requesting one or do I have to do something formal at the court?

Thanks

iFly55 wrote:

from my experience through 11b pre-trial motion, was that neither the date you were charged nor the early resolution meeting was when the clock starts

the JP at my trial ruled it's the day you filed your tickets at the sardine office, and expressed your intent to fight the charges

In the past though, you expressed your intent to fight the charges by choosing option 3 right at the beginning and separately requested a meeting with the prosecutor. Now it seems like you are only expressing your intent to fight the charges after the meeting so does it make it easier for the prosecutor to argue that the time period up to the meeting doesn't count?

I'm just wondering if this is a response by the courts to an increase in 11B applications to counter the rulings that have reduced the time period for the 11B process to become an option?

It probably was changed in hopes of adding some efficiency to speed up the process. They can now avoid booking trials for people who simply want to work out a deal with the Crown.

I think the change was in the works since prior to the recent 11b rulings. It was added through the most recent Good Government Act.

Does anyone have a link to the new PON form (front and specifically back) online?

http://www.ontariocourtforms.on.ca/engl ... -act-forms

The example for the form 4 appears to be updated with the correct wording for the back of the ticket.

Haven't seen a real one yet.

FYI.

The municipality has to opt in to the early resolution program. The back of our PON's didn't change Option 2 at all.

11b motion delay calculations, if I'm not mistaken, are being made based on the R. v. Andrade case. http://canlii.ca/t/fn8jv

I too wonder how the new Option will change the clock calculations.

Decatur wrote:

FYI.

The municipality has to opt in to the early resolution program. The back of our PON's didn't change Option 2 at all.

It's not a question of opting in. The old forms remain valid until March 31, 2013.

If you're interested in seeing why that's the case, here it is:

O. Reg 108/11 (which is also s. 1(3) of O.Reg 462/11) says:

Despite the revocation of Forms 1 to 7 of Regulation 949 of the Revised Regulations of Ontario, 1990 (Parking Infractions), those Forms may continue to be used, in addition to the Forms referred to in this Regulation, until the day that is one year after the day this section comes into force.

O.Reg 462/11 s. 7(2) says:

Sections 1 and 2 [referring to above] come into force on the later of the day subsection 7 (4) of Schedule 1 to the Good Government Act, 2011 comes into force and the day this Regulation is filed.

Regulation 462/11 was filed December 9, 2011. Schedule 1 s. 7(4) of the Good Government Act, 2011 is brought into force by the s. 11(2) of that Act, which says:

Subsections 1 (1), (3) and (7), sections 3 and 4, subsections 5 (1) and (3) to (6), 6 (1), (2) and (4) to (40) and 7 (1) to (9) and sections 9 and 10 come into force on a day to be named by proclamation of the Lieutenant Governor.

The Table of Proclamations states that s. 7(4) of the Good Government Act, 2011 is proclaimed in force on March 31, 2012.

Since this is the later date, the old forms will continue to be valid until March 31, 2013.

Stanton wrote:

http://www.ontariocourtforms.on.ca/engl ... -act-forms

Thanks.

Wonder why we got all new stock of Pon's then? We turned in all of our old ones and the new accused copy is blue instead of yellow. Our new ones are the Form 3 in the link provided.

I have researched this issue further and here is some clarification:

Some services use Form 3 Provincial Offence Notices. Some services use Form 4. Both forms have changed, as of March 31, 2012. The new forms are valid as of that date. The old Form 4s are not valid at all any more, and the old Form 3s are only valid for 6 months (not 12 as I had originally stated - was reading the wrong section).

There's not much difference between the old and new Form 3s, except that the defendant's copy is now blue, not yellow. Option 2 was and still is guilty with an explanation.

The big change is with Form 4. Option 2 on the old form was guilty with an explanation and option 3 was trial (with the possibility of an early resolution meeting). In the new Form 4 Option 2 is now early resolution meeting, option 3 is straight to trial, and the possibility of pleading guilty with an explanation before a JP and making submissions on sentence is gone.

Generally, services who used the old Form 3 will use the new one and services who used the old Form 4 will use the new one. The Ministry of the AG has informed police services that they can "opt-in" to using Form 4 (if the municipality and prosecuting agency is on board).

Hope this clarifies things.

Corporation (City of Mississauga) v. Lam, 2012 ONCJ 734 (CanLII)

http://canlii.ca/t/ftxn2

It appears that when you select Option 2 - "First Attendance Meeting" after receiving your offence notice, it will be considered as a neutral delay for your 11b time calculations; it could also be considered an implicit waiver of the delay.

Option 2 is simply a tool for the Prosecutor to fight 11B filings and increase the conviction rate.

On a speeding ticket I chose Option 2 - meet a prosecutor.

I never heard from them until they suspended my license. I will now pay the fine in order to get my license back as soon as possible but I want to fight this. How do I go about it after the fact ?

boatpoker wrote:

On a speeding ticket I chose Option 2 - meet a prosecutor.

I never heard from them until they suspended my license. I will now pay the fine in order to get my license back as soon as possible but I want to fight this. How do I go about it after the fact ?

You already asked this question and you got the perfect answer. Go to the courthouse and explain to them you chose option 2 and never heard a reply. They will reopen your case.

quick question.

On option 3 there are two check boxes. 1) for request of a trial and 2) I plan on questioning the validity of the officers evidence.

I assume I check both? When I called the office they said they will request a meeting ahead of trial with the JP to review the case and possible offer a plea, I am just looking to plea the ticket down.

Thanks!

Can anyone advise, I need to mail the ticket in.

Thanks