My court date is nearing at old city hall at appeals court. iwhats going to happen and what do i do? do I present my certificate of offence and point out to the judge the fine was incorrect, I did not appear and am now appealing on the grounds the Justice of the peace erred and failed to quash the ticket on the basis of the certificate not being properly examined and is not complete and regular on its face, and then submit the London V Young decision as my grounds for appeal. do i also submit that i had requested disclosure on two occasions and the prosecution failed to provide me with these court documents and lastly bring up that when i paid the fine in order to appeal it was also incorrect and the court clerk didnt even know which amount was too be paid? whats the procedure in court-are they going to have me make a opening argument per say?
My court date is nearing at old city hall at appeals court.
iwhats going to happen and what do i do?
do I present my certificate of offence and point out to the judge the fine was incorrect, I did not appear and am now appealing on the grounds the Justice of the peace erred and failed to quash the ticket on the basis of the certificate not being properly examined and is not complete and regular on its face, and then submit the London V Young decision as my grounds for appeal.
do i also submit that i had requested disclosure on two occasions and the prosecution failed to provide me with these court documents and lastly bring up that when i paid the fine in order to appeal it was also incorrect and the court clerk didnt even know which amount was too be paid?
whats the procedure in court-are they going to have me make a opening argument per say?
Unfortunately that case law is not valid any more, the fine does not have to be correct on a traffic ticket. You have no grounds for the appeal, the Justice will not quash the ticket for this offense. If you have any questions about an appeal, a licensed paralegal should be able review this for you at no charge and give you the right answers.
Unfortunately that case law is not valid any more, the fine does not have to be correct on a traffic ticket. You have no grounds for the appeal, the Justice will not quash the ticket for this offense.
If you have any questions about an appeal, a licensed paralegal should be able review this for you at no charge and give you the right answers.
Chris Conway
Retired Toronto Traffic Officer, Hit & Run Squad Detective,
Breathalyzer Tech, Radar/Highway Patrol
Licenced Paralegal
No longer valid? London v. Young was a decision by the Ontario Court of Appeal, so either they or the Supreme Court would have to overturn it, no? As recently as June 18 of this year it was still valid (R. v. Monahan). When was it reversed? If you have a link to the case law that overturned London v. Young, that would be great.
No longer valid? London v. Young was a decision by the Ontario Court of Appeal, so either they or the Supreme Court would have to overturn it, no? As recently as June 18 of this year it was still valid (R. v. Monahan). When was it reversed? If you have a link to the case law that overturned London v. Young, that would be great.
Particular ..I can see that. However--my case is cut and dry- the officer issued me a certificate of offence for 32km/h over the posted limit. he then fined me $120 set fine and $150 total payable. I dont show up in front of the JP on my court date and a conviction is entered. THEN when I got my conviction notice in the mail it says $160.. when I went to Edward St to pay my fine so i could do my appeal, the court clerk did an ICON Inquiry/Offence Inquiry and on the document (which I have a copy) states its $145. The court clerk didnt even know which Amount I should have paid (I paid the $160 which was on the conviction notice mailed to me). heres my argument: a) I have both a wrong set fine amount AND Total payable amount. then the court clerks office says $145, and my notice and Fine Due Date/Conviction Notice says $160. I have been lead to be confused-the court clerk was confused-- and if that is not Prejudicial! because the outcome could have prejudiced me by me paying the wrong fine amount with a deficiency, leading to a unpaid fine and then a licence suspension. That is my argument. and it started by the issuing officer making a mistake in the first place. Then the JP erred by NOT examining the Offence Notice. Now the court clerks office has made a mistake by entering a completely different amount. the ACTUAL fine for 32 over is not $120. I just hope the Judge sees it from my point of view.
Reflections wrote:
Also, I have heard that Appeal judges can be particular. I would hire representation.
Particular ..I can see that.
However--my case is cut and dry-
the officer issued me a certificate of offence for 32km/h over the posted limit.
he then fined me $120 set fine and $150 total payable. I dont show up in front of the JP on my court date and a conviction is entered.
THEN when I got my conviction notice in the mail it says $160..
when I went to Edward St to pay my fine so i could do my appeal, the court clerk did an ICON Inquiry/Offence Inquiry and on the document (which I have a copy) states its $145.
The court clerk didnt even know which Amount I should have paid (I paid the $160 which was on the conviction notice mailed to me).
heres my argument: a) I have both a wrong set fine amount AND Total payable amount. then the court clerks office says $145, and my notice and Fine Due Date/Conviction Notice says $160.
I have been lead to be confused-the court clerk was confused--
and if that is not Prejudicial! because the outcome could have prejudiced me by me paying the wrong fine amount with a deficiency, leading to a unpaid fine and then a licence suspension.
That is my argument. and it started by the issuing officer making a mistake in the first place. Then the JP erred by NOT examining the Offence Notice. Now the court clerks office has made a mistake by entering a completely different amount.
the ACTUAL fine for 32 over is not $120.
I just hope the Judge sees it from my point of view.
NOPE. i have managed with the help of a few people here managed to get this far. im just wondering how the procedure was going to play out on hearing day in a few weeks
Reflections wrote:
So are you hiring someone or not?
NOPE. i have managed with the help of a few people here managed to get this far.
im just wondering how the procedure was going to play out on hearing day in a few weeks
Apologies in advance for the lengthy reply here. It may be a little difficult to fight, but until I get some actual case law that says London v. Young is no longer applicable, I'm going to stick with the idea that the law should be on your side. Present everything - the error on the ticket, the lack of disclosure, just like you said in your original post. Your appeal is under section 135 of the Provincial Offences Act. The procedure for it is loosely outlined in section 136, which basically says it is like a "review." (FYI - Justice is wearing a red sash, he's addressed as "Your Honour" as opposed to "Your Worship." Green sash = JP, "Your Worship.") When you begin, state in some way that you are unable to afford a lawyer so you appreciate their understanding, as you have no formal legal training yourself. Your evidence is straightforward: You received a ticket, did not appear for trial, the ticket was not complete and regular on its face, the Justice of the Peace entered a conviction contrary to the procedure required by section 9.1 of the Provincial Offences Act and against precedent established by London v. Young, City of Barrie v. Porter, City of Sudbury v. Leikermoser, R. v. Monahan and R. v. Montone, and that the ticket should be quashed and a finding of not guilty entered against you. You may be asked why you did not appear for trial. Have a binder of evidence and your arguments. Study those specific cases and see what you can do with them. R. v. Montone is very similar to your case, except it was for running a red light. Basically you can use transcripts, or any records you can get, to show that the fines were incorrect. The JP cannot amend the certificate without you present. Justice K. Feldman of the Ontario Court of Appeal wrote in the London v. Young case that "the set fine forms part of the basis used by the defendant to decide whether to default." The other thing to add to your arguments that you already posted is that if the fine is incorrect, you could possibly run into trouble for not completely paying the fine, or you could be ripped off for over-paying. They're supposed to correct it, but given the numerous mistakes already made, that seems unlikely. When someone defaults and does not appear for trial, the state has the obligation to ensure that the paperwork is done correctly. If not, someone could get their licence suspended or get ripped off because of a paperwork error, which is why the fine should be correct and proper and the JP must examine it - as you said. You have now had three different fines given by three different people. How is a layperson supposed to know which one to pay? This is not acceptable, it is a Gong Show, and the only fair remedy is to quash the certificate. They'll probably argue that you did file for a trial, which is different than not responding, but R. v. Leikermoser says that failure to appear triggers the same provisions as failure to respond. Anyway... that's what I would do. Keep in mind, though, that I do not have formal legal training. While I have observed quite a few trials, defended myself a couple of times and helped a few friends with theirs, that's the extent of it. I do not pretend that I'm some sort of expert. IF we can confirm that London v. Young is no longer applicable, that changes things... but you still could argue that the whole thing should be quashed because of the administrative errors made by the JP and clerk. Good luck with it.
Apologies in advance for the lengthy reply here. It may be a little difficult to fight, but until I get some actual case law that says London v. Young is no longer applicable, I'm going to stick with the idea that the law should be on your side. Present everything - the error on the ticket, the lack of disclosure, just like you said in your original post. Your appeal is under section 135 of the Provincial Offences Act. The procedure for it is loosely outlined in section 136, which basically says it is like a "review."
(FYI - Justice is wearing a red sash, he's addressed as "Your Honour" as opposed to "Your Worship." Green sash = JP, "Your Worship.") When you begin, state in some way that you are unable to afford a lawyer so you appreciate their understanding, as you have no formal legal training yourself. Your evidence is straightforward: You received a ticket, did not appear for trial, the ticket was not complete and regular on its face, the Justice of the Peace entered a conviction contrary to the procedure required by section 9.1 of the Provincial Offences Act and against precedent established by London v. Young, City of Barrie v. Porter, City of Sudbury v. Leikermoser, R. v. Monahan and R. v. Montone, and that the ticket should be quashed and a finding of not guilty entered against you. You may be asked why you did not appear for trial.
Have a binder of evidence and your arguments. Study those specific cases and see what you can do with them. R. v. Montone is very similar to your case, except it was for running a red light. Basically you can use transcripts, or any records you can get, to show that the fines were incorrect. The JP cannot amend the certificate without you present. Justice K. Feldman of the Ontario Court of Appeal wrote in the London v. Young case that "the set fine forms part of the basis used by the defendant to decide whether to default."
The other thing to add to your arguments that you already posted is that if the fine is incorrect, you could possibly run into trouble for not completely paying the fine, or you could be ripped off for over-paying. They're supposed to correct it, but given the numerous mistakes already made, that seems unlikely. When someone defaults and does not appear for trial, the state has the obligation to ensure that the paperwork is done correctly. If not, someone could get their licence suspended or get ripped off because of a paperwork error, which is why the fine should be correct and proper and the JP must examine it - as you said. You have now had three different fines given by three different people. How is a layperson supposed to know which one to pay? This is not acceptable, it is a Gong Show, and the only fair remedy is to quash the certificate.
They'll probably argue that you did file for a trial, which is different than not responding, but R. v. Leikermoser says that failure to appear triggers the same provisions as failure to respond.
Anyway... that's what I would do. Keep in mind, though, that I do not have formal legal training. While I have observed quite a few trials, defended myself a couple of times and helped a few friends with theirs, that's the extent of it. I do not pretend that I'm some sort of expert. IF we can confirm that London v. Young is no longer applicable, that changes things... but you still could argue that the whole thing should be quashed because of the administrative errors made by the JP and clerk.
It seems like a waste to hire representation for a Part I appeal after a s.9 or s.9.1 conviction. There should be no transcript, just the certificate of offence, the conviction order/notice signed by the JP, and the original offence notice that you would bring to the appeal. Am I right in all that? s. 118(1) of the POA expressly allows you to represent yourself, even for a Part III appeal, so it should be no problem for a Part I appeal. I would think that the judge would be ticked at the JP for wasting their time with such appeals, and tell them to strictly adhere to London v. Young.
It seems like a waste to hire representation for a Part I appeal after a s.9 or s.9.1 conviction. There should be no transcript, just the certificate of offence, the conviction order/notice signed by the JP, and the original offence notice that you would bring to the appeal. Am I right in all that?
s. 118(1) of the POA expressly allows you to represent yourself, even for a Part III appeal, so it should be no problem for a Part I appeal.
I would think that the judge would be ticked at the JP for wasting their time with such appeals, and tell them to strictly adhere to London v. Young.
The end result was in this thread here: http://www.ontariohighwaytrafficact.com/topic1730.html Off Camber won. The presiding Justice at the appeal quashed the certificate. The Prosecutor even conceeded as soon as Off Camber presented an argument from City of Barrie v. Porter. Depends on how confident/competent one is. Off Camber did it on his own, but he also did his homework properly and researched everything thoroughly, and I'm sure had a pretty good idea of how to present himself in court. Not everyone is as well-versed. You'd think so. However, the position of JP was created to expedite legal proceedings. Some are very good at what they do and have the same expertise as a real Justice, most of them are fair and reasonable, and some are "interesting" for lack of a better expression. I've heard of JPs telling defendants that the ticket itself is the only disclosure they shall get; rejecting joint submissions and sending the defendant to the Crowbar Hilton, and imposing a fine that was double the statutory maximum, when the Crown and defence had asked for a licence suspension and $1000 fine; convicting a defendant because he was wearing a Rastafarian hat (that JP was subsequently dismissed from the bench); and, of course, we have these foul-ups by not quashing a ticket with a fatal error. However, in their defence, most of them only attended a meagre 2 weeks of JP school, which is nothing compared to the extensive stuff you have to do at law school - which a real Justice must have attended. The majority of JPs do a good job. It's the ones who don't have a clue that we hear about the most, unfortunately.
Off Camber won. The presiding Justice at the appeal quashed the certificate. The Prosecutor even conceeded as soon as Off Camber presented an argument from City of Barrie v. Porter.
Keroba wrote:
It seems like a waste to hire representation for a Part I appeal after a s.9 or s.9.1 conviction.
Depends on how confident/competent one is. Off Camber did it on his own, but he also did his homework properly and researched everything thoroughly, and I'm sure had a pretty good idea of how to present himself in court. Not everyone is as well-versed.
Keroba wrote:
I would think that the judge would be ticked at the JP for wasting their time with such appeals, and tell them to strictly adhere to London v. Young.
You'd think so. However, the position of JP was created to expedite legal proceedings. Some are very good at what they do and have the same expertise as a real Justice, most of them are fair and reasonable, and some are "interesting" for lack of a better expression.
I've heard of JPs telling defendants that the ticket itself is the only disclosure they shall get; rejecting joint submissions and sending the defendant to the Crowbar Hilton, and imposing a fine that was double the statutory maximum, when the Crown and defence had asked for a licence suspension and $1000 fine; convicting a defendant because he was wearing a Rastafarian hat (that JP was subsequently dismissed from the bench); and, of course, we have these foul-ups by not quashing a ticket with a fatal error. However, in their defence, most of them only attended a meagre 2 weeks of JP school, which is nothing compared to the extensive stuff you have to do at law school - which a real Justice must have attended. The majority of JPs do a good job. It's the ones who don't have a clue that we hear about the most, unfortunately.
* 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
I'm one of those poorly versed individuals. I nearly crapped myself the first trial I went in for. :oops: However now I'm going in for two more trials soon and I'm thousands times more confident. Just walk in with the right knowledge and you're golden. This is a little belated but congrats on the win Off_Camber, and hopefully you get your suspension thing figured out.
Keroba wrote:
It seems like a waste to hire representation for a Part I appeal after a s.9 or s.9.1 conviction.
Depends on how confident/competent one is. Off Camber did it on his own, but he also did his homework properly and researched everything thoroughly, and I'm sure had a pretty good idea of how to present himself in court. Not everyone is as well-versed.
I'm one of those poorly versed individuals. I nearly crapped myself the first trial I went in for.
However now I'm going in for two more trials soon and I'm thousands times more confident. Just walk in with the right knowledge and you're golden.
This is a little belated but congrats on the win Off_Camber, and hopefully you get your suspension thing figured out.
I got ticket for failing to stop at stop sign in Toronto. i heard that the police officer must see the stop line, if there is one, from where he was sitting. That is exactly my case, Is it a strong case? If so do i need a picture to show that there is a stop line and a picture to show that he could not see the stop line from where he was sitting?
I got a ticket, Disobey stop sign, sec 136.1.a on dec 6th
I made a left in an intersection and was pulled over by a police officer in an unmarked car who had been sitting down the road. A classic fishing hole situation. I was genuinely surprised when he stopped me and told me I went through a stop sign without even slowing down. I know to shut up and be polite and take the ticket. I…
Yesterday morning, I rear-ended someone. I was going the speed limit. The sun was directly in front of me and it blinded my windshield and my eyes. At the same time, the person in front of me stopped/slowed down (also due to the sun). I started to slow down but didn't stop and I hit them since I couldn't see anything. I was not driving too close initially. I…
I was driving in the county at night and hit a limousine stretched out side ways across the road. The limo had its lights on and had side lighting as well. The police officer charged me with careless driving because it was "fully lit up".
It took me to the next day to figure out what had happened - what I remember made no sense. What I had run across was a "false visual reference" illusion.
I was on hwy 37 trying to make my girlfriends ganadmas mass and I live an hour away and I had an hour to get there so I was going fast but not 50 over untill some idiot got on my tail soo close that I was to concentrated on him that I kept going faster untill I got pulled over at 147 on an 80 km hwy.
I alreaddy lost 3 points and this time was just the…
Hello, got stopped today for rolling a stop sign. Ticket says failure to stop, but quotes hta 1361b.
Doesn't 1361b mean failure to yield?
Is this a fatal error? Or could it be amended at trial. How can I prepare a defence if I don't know if I'm defending the failure to stop or the failure to yield?
After he was providing me with a ticket for failure to obey to the stop sign (I am pretty sure I stopped but less than 3 seconds recommended by my driver ed. instructor), I know everybody say that..as an excuse.
Then he stopped me again to return the documents.
Any advice and feed back would be really appreciated.
Can you get evidence for whether someone had an advanced green at an intersection? My dad was making a right turn on a red (after stopping) into a plaza parking lot. He got hit by someone making a left turn from the opposite lane. The driver told the officer called to the collision that he had an advance green. My dad said he came out of nowhere which makes me…
So i was driving on Eglinton Avenue East near Rosemount Ave.
The school bus was on the the curb on the opposite side of the road while i was travelling on the middle lane of the three-laned Eglinton Avenue East (five lanes apart plus a raised median island seperating the traffic)
I could not see the school bus as my view of the bus was being obstructed by the cars in front of me and on my left hand…
Lots of good information on getting disclosure from the Crown here.
Now, I am just wondering if I will be relying upon evidence of my own at trial... do I have to voluntarily send this material to the Crown in a reasonable time before the trial, or only if they request disclosure from me?
This morning I had an exam for university. I was studying the entire night and i wanted to catch like maybe 1-2 hours of sleep before the exam so i went to sleep. I woke up like 5 hrs after and realize that I was about to miss my exam. I still could have made it so I asked my dad for his car since I was in a huge rush and he gave it to me.
I went on the highway and I was going at 135 km/h but…
the police officer was in in the opesite oncumming lane he was fallowing another car so close that i was not even able to see his cruser till he was buy he said that i was going 111 in a 80 he said he hade me on radar he only asked for me drivers licencs and never asked for my insurence so on the ticket there no insurence dose enyone think i can beat this i wana take it to cort becuse he was…
Hi I have a couple questions so I'll explain my situation and any advice would be appreciated.
Can't remember exact date so lets call it some time in 2008 I got a fine for $5000.00 for driving without in insurance. I never paid the fine and in 2012 I was pulled over and the officer asked to see my license. Although I had it on me I figured it would be under suspension for the unpaid fine from…
Alright, so I did something really stupid the other day, I was driving down a country road and wanted to hit the curves so I passed 3 cars at once, inadvertently making it up to very much past 50 over (80 limit)... Much to my chagrin there was a cop coming in the opposite direction who immediately skidded on the gravel shoulder and who I thought was 100% going to turn around and pull me over,…
Anyone know how backed this courthouse is? I submitted my ticket for trial at the end of August, and still no letter. Im scared it got lost in the mail, can i call the courthouse and find out my courtdate? Or would i have to go in personally?
I recently received a ticket for failure to use low beams - while following - Ticket was issued Sec 168 (
- it was on the 401 and no one was within 500 meters of me, I was warning a oncoming vehicle that there was an officer hiding (which is not illegal or I could not find a law against it) it was a police vehicle travelling at very high rate of speed in the opposite direction with no lights on…
I received a warning letter from MTO for a 2pts ticket.What happened is that the police officer issued a "unsafe left turn" and then changed the ticket to "failed to signal" at the scene, but she submitted both tickets!!! And I !!!ONLY!!! received the latter ticket from her(I requested trial for "failed to signal"). I recently received notice from MTO that I'm convicted for "unsafe left turn".
Hello everyone! I was given a ticket for using a hand-held communication device while driving. It was 3 am, I was at a stop light and the cop saw me with the my phone in my hand. I told him i was just checking the time on it. I received the notes a few weeks ago ill copy them down below. Any help is appreciated although i believe there's no hope for me. The cop recorded me saying what phone i…
I got pulled over about 15 or so days ago the court till this date has not received the summons what is the legal time period that the court has to follow to accept the summons from the office court says its 15 days is the legal timeframe the officer has to serve it on the court
I requested for disclosure of information two months ago.
I received the radar manual after one month, but not others (including maintenance/calibration record of the radar, certificate of police training). On further pursuit, the prosecutor told me that he did not have them and he did not see why I needed these documents. He said he did not know where to get them when I asked.
Last Friday I was pulled over by an OPP motorcycle cop who informed me I was going 134. I was on the SB 404, I did see him parked under a bridge and when I passed him he was not on his bike.
I'm hoping to get some insight for a defense in this case.
I was in lane 1 and I had a car in front of me, and a car behind me, also there was a car speeding down Lane 3 passing everyone and moved quickly into…
