Over 1 year since charge and no trial? 11B?

NGG
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 1
Joined:

Over 1 year since charge and no trial? 11B?

Unread post by NGG on

Hi Guys,

So I was in court on the 8th of February for my speeding ticket trial, for which I was charged on the 10th of January 2011. I have read that I have a good 11B defense as more than a year has past since I was charged, but heres the twist. When I had scheduled the trial, the clerk insisted I schedule a first attendance with the prosecutor. That was scheduled for the 15th of May 2011 but I did not attend, as I really just wanted to fight the ticket in court (its my first ticket). Now, my question is - does my 11B defense time start on the day I was charged, or the day of my first attendance?

Background Info:

When I was in court on the 15th, I intended to plead 11B but found out before the Judge there and then that there was a procedure that must be followed before the 11B can be heard in court. The prosecutor was very rude and said I had no basis as its only been 8 months since my first attendance and 8 months was not enough for a 11B regardless. I had no representation, and for that sole reason the judge allowed the trial to be adjourned to the 29th of February, in order for me to file the documents for the 11B. Side Note: the officer was outside the court room as I was infront of the judge. Does that mean he didn't intend to stand up for his tickets? I believe there was a call made out to him but he still didn't come in.

On the 16th of February, I followed the numerous threads on this forum on how to file a 11B. Everything has been done, and I have also ordered the transcript of my last trial. I have faxed the Attorney General of Ontario and Canada the copy of my Notice of Application of Stay of Proceedings but do not have any fax receipts, I do however have commissioned Affidavits of Service. I sent the faxes via a local small business and they didn't provide me with the fax receipts.. Are the Affidavits sufficient enough?

ALL REPLIES ARE MUCH APPRECIATED! ANY ADVICE FOR ME IN COURT?

THANKS IN ADVANCE!


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

Posting Awards

Unread post by iFly55 on

i had a similar situation during my trial, where the crown argued that i formed my intentions to go to trial at the First Attendance meeting... so that's where my 11b clock was supposed to start

however you need to stand your ground, and argue that the date you filed your tickets at the sardine-office was the date you formed your intentions to go to trial and that the First Attendance was just merely part of the trial process to seek a speedy-remedy to your charge w/o going to trial

you have to convince the JP of this


User avatar
Reflections
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1490
Joined:
Location: somewhere in traffic

Moderator

Unread post by Reflections on

The onous is on the crown to get the trial scheduled within 11 months of the ticket being issued. There is plenty of case law, here on the site that pertains to this very subject......... how you do this in court is up to you. Remember though, that you are not a lawyer and you don't need all the fancy jargon, just bring a copy of the CANLII documents, if possible siting the cases mentioned here. Try to make your points as clear as possible.<< this is advice, I am not a lawyer.
http://www.OHTA.ca OR http://www.OntarioTrafficAct.com


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

Unread post by Simon Borys on

I agree that courts are more lenient towards unrepresented people bringing 11(b) applications, but you have to realize that they are not simple applications to argue. The reason being that the math is not simple. It's not just a question of how much time has passed, or even how much time has passed that is attributable to the defence. There's more subtlety that goes into the calculations of delay. And then there's the issue of prejudice that everybody seems to forget about, but the Supreme Court was quite clear in R v Godin (2009) is crucial.

With respect to the delay calculations, for example, every case has a period of time from the date the charge is laid to the time the clock starts that is known as the intake period. That period of time is considered neutral and doesn't count towards 11(b) delay. Intake periods are around 1-2 months depending on the complexity of the case and the way the JP chops it up. How much time in your case was neutral intake? Who knows, but that's the kind of thing that makes it not so cut and dry.

Another example, there's a 2011 case from the Ontario Superior Court (R v Lahiry) which basically says that defence counsel are not ready to actually conduct the trial on the date they set the trial date, so the clock shouldn't start running right then either. Based on this reasoning a judge can chop some more time out of your 11(b) argument.

All of these points, as well as the prejudice issue, are open to debate and argument, which is why, again, I say that it's not that simple. I'm not trying to discourage you from attempting this yourself, may people here have been successful doing so, but I just don't want anybody to underestimate what they're getting into and not be prepared.
http://www.boryslaw.ca
NOTHING I SAY ON HERE IS LEGAL ADVICE.


gramada2
Jr. Member
Jr. Member
Posts: 41
Joined:

Unread post by gramada2 on

I just won my case using 11b. It was quite easy. Just file it in time an get all the party stamp the application.
The funny thing in the court was the prosecutor said they never received it but their stamp was on the first page.
Also i sent 2 requests for disclosure and i did not get any. In the court the prosecutor send the officer to bring me his notes.
So there he comes with the notes and handing it to me outside the court room. I just said i don't have time to read it now and i like the notes to be given to me before the judge.The officer agreed. The prosecutor was very nasty and rude as usual i guess. When it came time to argue the 11b she just dropped all the charges.
I gave them no chance . 11b submitted in time and no disclosure-sure enough.






Post Reply

Return to “Exceeding the speed limit by 16 to 29 km/h”