New options on back of tickets

Stanton
High Authority
High Authority
Posts: 2111
Joined:
Location: Ontario

New options on back of tickets

Unread post by Stanton on

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.


jetblue
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 18
Joined:

Unread post by jetblue on

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?


iFly55
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 561
Joined:

Posting Awards

Unread post by iFly55 on

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


wizzard
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 12
Joined:

Unread post by wizzard on

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


jetblue
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 18
Joined:

Unread post by jetblue on

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?


Stanton
High Authority
High Authority
Posts: 2111
Joined:
Location: Ontario

Unread post by Stanton on

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.


User avatar
Simon Borys
VIP
VIP
Posts: 1065
Joined:
Contact:

Unread post by Simon Borys on

Does anyone have a link to the new PON form (front and specifically back) online?
http://www.boryslaw.ca
NOTHING I SAY ON HERE IS LEGAL ADVICE.


Stanton
High Authority
High Authority
Posts: 2111
Joined:
Location: Ontario

Unread post by Stanton on



User avatar
Decatur
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 697
Joined:

Posting Awards

Moderator

Unread post by Decatur on

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.


mnstrcck
Jr. Member
Jr. Member
Posts: 61
Joined:

Unread post by mnstrcck on

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.


User avatar
Simon Borys
VIP
VIP
Posts: 1065
Joined:
Contact:

Unread post by Simon Borys on

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.
http://www.boryslaw.ca
NOTHING I SAY ON HERE IS LEGAL ADVICE.


User avatar
Simon Borys
VIP
VIP
Posts: 1065
Joined:
Contact:

Unread post by Simon Borys on

http://www.boryslaw.ca
NOTHING I SAY ON HERE IS LEGAL ADVICE.


User avatar
Decatur
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 697
Joined:

Posting Awards

Moderator

Unread post by Decatur on

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.


User avatar
Simon Borys
VIP
VIP
Posts: 1065
Joined:
Contact:

Unread post by Simon Borys on

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.
http://www.boryslaw.ca
NOTHING I SAY ON HERE IS LEGAL ADVICE.


iFly55
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 561
Joined:

Posting Awards

Unread post by iFly55 on

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.






Post Reply

Return to “Courts and Procedure”