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 have a problem and not sure what the hell to do about it. Few days ago I was stopped on a street going westbound against blinding afternoon sun following the flow of traffic. I drive a taxi for living in Toronto and have ACZ driver's license. I have a perfect record both for professional as well regular demerit points. I haven't been pulled over as a matter of fact in some 15 years for…
I have recently gone to court for a speeding ticket issued by an OPP officer. As it stood, the officer forgot to sign the ticket. So at my trial, before I made a plea, I pointed this out to the justice of the peace and asked that the ticket be quashed. I was asked to produce my copy of the ticket, which I gave and the JOP then agreed with me and dismissed the case. Before he did so, the…
I got pulled over (along with about 10 other cars) for going through a road closed sign. I had just pulled out of a parking lot pretty much right beside the road closed sign, and with about 4 cars behind me there wasn't much I could do but go through, so I think I have a good chance of fighting it. However, on my ticket under the Signature of issuing Provincial Offences Officer, it's left…
So here's my situation, any advice would be appreciated.
On June 26, 2013 I received a ticket for 25 over in a 60 zone
In early October I received my notice of trial (Feb 25, 2014)
In early January I sent in my request for disclosure
In late January I received a letter to pick up my disclosure, however when I picked up my disclosure it wasn't typed (I had requested it to be) and I needed…
Is there a legal requirement to report an accident to the insurer?
Scenario
- 2 vehicle accident
- each vehicle has less than $1000 damage
- each vehicle has damage roughly equal to insurance deductible
- a police Accident Report was completed
In this scenario the drivers decided to repair their own damages. But are they legally bound to report the accident and damages to the insurer? ...and out of…
I will be representing my wife at her speeding trial next week. Mostly everything is pretty much run of the mill but since she wasn't speeding we will be having her take the stand. Since this opens up the opportunity for the prosecutor to cross examine, I am just wondering if anyone here knows what kind of questions we should expect from the prosecutor in order to best prepare.
i got pulled over by a cop this morning in my kids's school zone for failure to stop at a stop sign. i am thinking of fighting this ticket, but i noticed that on the ticket itself it only says "disobey stop sign - fail to stop" and there is no mention of the demerit points. a co-worker mentioned to me that a ticket should state how many demerit points i am being docked. i know the Highway Traffic…
Alright, so this happened back awhile ago on June and I haven't appeared in Court. However, I would like some inputs and advice before I get into this battle.
Back in June I got a Speeding Ticket claiming I was going 100km/h on Blackcreek going south towards Lawrence. The Speed Limit there is 70km/h.
At this point of time, it was roughly traffic hour around 4-5PM. Coming off of the Highway, and…
Ive already done searches, read the act as best i can but still haven't read a complete answer. Where in the HTA does it state that the front license plate must be attached to the front bumper? I have it on the passenger sun visor (if ppl remember the old temp permits that taped to the pass side of windshield) i figured that this spot would be the same. However now they have got rid of…
My son was returning from school and was just entering the driveway when another vehicle hit the rear end. Police writes a ticket "fail to yield from private drive" 139(i). He is going to fight this ticket and made an application for disclosure. The trial is next week and he still hasn't received the disclosure.
He checked with the court last month and they said that they will call when disclosure…
i was travelling on the 401 (posted speed 100km/h) in the far left lane, when i caught up to a vehicle going ~110km/h. I patiently waited for the vehicle to move over a lane, but they did not. The vehicle behind me moved to the center lane to pass, but because he was a safe distance behind me, i moved into the middle lane ahead of him to pass the slower moving car. When I accelerated, i…
So I was returning from my honeymoon in Montreal, and was cruising down the 401 just inside the Ontario/Quebec border. I was passing one of the Onroute stations and saw an OPP cruiser. I checked my speed and I was doing 120. A few kilometers up the road the cruiser pulled me over and told me I was clocked doing 132 by the aircraft. I was a little surprised to see the ticket was for the full…
I made a right turn during prohibited hours (7am-6pm) in Toronto. I was ticketed by a COP who was specially watching for that trap.
After I've received the ticket HTA144(9), I discovered one of the seven digits of my license plate was incorrectly written on my ticket. I was thinking about to make a First Attendance at the court office to see the prosecutor for a reduced charge...any advice or…
Have been busy and haven't had much time to follow up on this...
Went to court having not received disclosure (and was not organized enough to apply for a stay), so the trial was adjourned. They photocopied the officer's ticket and notes and provided a log sheet from the plane. I've sent another request for the rest of the disclosure items.
So here's my question -- can an officer amend the ticket…
I am not sure if my case is really a case of " mis-use parking permit" and need some advises on whether i should fight the ticket. Here is what happened:
During the labor day long weekend, I took my parents to diner at a local shopping mall. (my father's hip was broken in 2016 and he's been on wheelchair since, the permit is in his name and I been using the permit to help him for doctor's…
I have a court date coming up where I need to subpoena one of the officers that was present when I got my ticket. The issuing officer didn't include the fact that the second one was present at the time in his report (disclosure) but did give me the second officers name and badge number after the judge told him to do it.
What I'm looking for help with is the process of me getting to…
I got pulled over on a 4 lane section fo Highway 7... Thank god I didn't get a stay at home ticket as well or my car impounded.
Officer clocked me at 156 km/h he decided not to impound my car and give me a 149 km/h since it was my first offence and he said I was polite and respectful. I would give this officer a 5/5 review if I could, very polite and respectful.
Long story short, I was driving from Toronto to Ottawa and around Napanee with my friend in two separated cars, the officer was parked on uturn. He followed us turn his light on and got between us and pulled us over, he told me that i was running at 152 km/h without showing me his LISAR. they suspended my and my friends license and impounded the two cars for 7 days. This was a Friday in January…
I'm unsure on what to do here. I was under the impression that I could request a stay on the day of trial because disclosure was not given to me in an adequate time. I requested disclosure 2x by fax, 5 months ago.
I read on ticketcombat that I had to file a motion 15 days prior to the trial to request a stay of proceedings.
Does anyone else get blinded by fog lights on rural roads? I don't seem to have a problem with them on lighted streets, but the badly aimed fog lights or ones with a poor cutoff really get to me when driving the Escort. I just came back from a 20-minute drive, and every single pickup truck had fog lights on, and forced me to focus on the bottom right of the road. My windshield is clean and…
