Unbelievable Trial Yesterday - Disobey Sign - HTA 182 (2)

mountaineerca
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 7
Joined:

Unbelievable Trial Yesterday - Disobey Sign - HTA 182 (2)

Unread post by mountaineerca on

I got an Unbelievable Trial Yesterday - Disobey Sign - HTA 182 (2) and would like to share it.

I received a ticket of disobey sign - HTA 182 (2) in May 2008. The charge is that I made a right turn at a quiet residential area where there is a sign saying no right turn from 10 AM to 6 PM on Saturday. I requested a trial. The trial was scheduled for yesterday.

3 months before the trial date, I sent a registered letter to the prosecutor's office asking for disclosure. In May 2009 I picked up the disclosure from their office. There are 2 pages, 1 is the officer's notes and the other is the ticket (officer copy).

I felt it was hard for me to read the officer's notes so I requested disclosure-disclosure, typewritten format of the original disclosure. The request was sent to the prosecutor's office 6 times from May 2009 to July 2009. There is no response whatsoever.

Yesterday is the trial date. I showed up and the cop showed up too. I pleaded not guilty and asked for a trial. Before the trial started formally, the judge asked me to disclose what I had in my file folder to the crown. I mentioned to the crown that there was no response to my repeated requests for disclosure-disclosure. The crown acknowledged they had received my requests and they hadn't given me any response. She agreed to request the case be adjourned.

Now is the unbelievable part. The judge heard the request and refused adjourn the case. His reason is this is a simple ticket. The ticket itself is good disclosure. He read 2 similar cases to me and denied my right to get disclosure-disclosure. He also said if I had any questions about the disclosure I received, I could ask the cop during the trial.

I feel he violated my rights as per Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The response of "No more disclosure" for my disclosure-disclosure request is still a disclosure. I was given that only 20 seconds before the trial started. It's unbelievable a judge would do that to me.

I would like to request help on what to do next.

Many thanks.


User avatar
Radar Identified
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2881
Joined:
Location: Toronto

Moderator

Unread post by Radar Identified on

Just to clarify, was there a conviction against you?


mountaineerca
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 7
Joined:

Unread post by mountaineerca on

Radar Identified wrote:Just to clarify, was there a conviction against you?
Yes, there was a guilty conviction. The judge forced me to take the trial after he declared there will be no more disclosure for my disclosure-disclosure request. You can imagine during the trial he took whatever the cop told the court and declared I was guilty of "disobey sign".

However I feel the trial was fundamentally wrong since the stupid judge violated Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms no matter how perfect the evidence looks! that's the last thing he should do. Unfortunately I don't know too much about law and only realized that after the trial.


big red
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 2
Joined:

Unread post by big red on

since you were convicted the only recourse is to appeal however you do have to file your intention to appeal within a relatively quick time frame - I believe something like 10 or 15 days. However, you have to actually pay the fine prior to being able to file your notice of intention to appeal.

I went to trial back in November 2008 for a speeding ticket and lost (total bs...grrr) and right away i hired a lawyer/paralegal to handle the appeal for me becuase i had found the process of the trial to be so intimidating (probably contributing to my loss!!) so unfortunately i don't know all of the particulars of the appeals procedures. A lawyer is not necessarily a cheap option however they do know exactly how to proceed...

Good luck!!

BR


Lawman
Jr. Member
Jr. Member
Posts: 68
Joined:

Unread post by Lawman on

Just read a case on disclosure yesterday.

Read it and all the referenced cases therein.

http://www.canlii.org/en/on/oncj/doc/20 ... cj307.html

You can also request under the POA s. 111 (2) that the fine not be paid until the appeal is heard and decided.


POA

http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statut ... .htm#BK138

Payment of fine before appeal

111. (1) A notice of appeal by a defendant shall not be accepted for filing if the defendant has not paid in full the fine imposed by the decision appealed from.

Exception with recognizance

(2) A judge may waive compliance with subsection (1) and order that the appellant enter into a recognizance to appear on the appeal, and the recognizance shall be in such amount, with or without sureties, as the judge directs


mountaineerca
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 7
Joined:

Unread post by mountaineerca on

Thanks for your input. Now I decided to appeal for this case but I have no idea about how to write an appeal. Any help on this?


Lawman
Jr. Member
Jr. Member
Posts: 68
Joined:

Unread post by Lawman on

Call the court and get there advise on how to file the appeal. The details of the appeal we can help you with. Start by requesting the judge waive the requirement that you pay the fine prior to filing the appeal.

Here is the sections of the POA regarding appeals.

http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statut ... .htm#BK138

For me, you want a new trial. You can argue new points of law at a new trial but you cannot at an appeal. During the appeal the justice will only deal with the trial that is already concluded.

I'll have to review the Act and think about about your case. But call the court tomorrow and get the ball rolling.


mountaineerca
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 7
Joined:

Unread post by mountaineerca on

THANKS. I have requested the transcript. The next step is go to the appeal court and apply for appeal. I would like to request help on this application.


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

Moderator

Unread post by Reflections on

mountaineerca wrote:THANKS. I have requested the transcript. The next step is go to the appeal court and apply for appeal. I would like to request help on this application.
Appeals are more indepth than the first trial. I would advise a paralegal....
http://www.OHTA.ca OR http://www.OntarioTrafficAct.com


User avatar
Radar Identified
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2881
Joined:
Location: Toronto

Moderator

Unread post by Radar Identified on

Reflections wrote:Appeals are more indepth than the first trial. I would advise a paralegal....
Agreed.


CoolChick
Member
Member
Posts: 103
Joined:

Unread post by CoolChick on

Doesn't the law require that any person charged, needs to fully understand the charges against them. ? By that I take it that it means that they (the accused) are to be given all they need in order to obtain that understanding. Surely disclosures are a main component of understanding anything that one is charged with ?

When you are in court, just keep telling them you do not understand.... for a fair trial you must understand the process and if it is lacking something that would better your understanding ( ie disclosures that you are entitled to) you are entitled to it.

I really think you get amazing advice on this forum.... I am totally in awe of the extent of helpful advice.... :)

Also i was told that appeals that are based on your 'lack of understanding' of the case at hand are often upheld....???


User avatar
Radar Identified
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2881
Joined:
Location: Toronto

Moderator

Unread post by Radar Identified on

More or less, but saying you don't understand something isn't a loophole. The real issue here was lack of disclosure. Proper disclosure is needed so that a defendant can "make a full answer and defence," most of which comes from common-law history and the R. v. Stinchcombe case.

The most important statement in that case is:
What are the legal consequences flowing from the failure to disclose? In my opinion, when a court of appeal is called upon to review a failure to disclose, it must consider whether such failure impaired the right to make full answer and defence. This in turn depends on the nature of the information withheld and whether it might have affected the outcome.
The Crown has to give relevant info. In this instance, the real question is how much evidence is in the officer's notes? If mountaineerca gets it typewritten, would the information in the notes "affect the outcome"?


mountaineerca
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 7
Joined:

Unread post by mountaineerca on

Radar Identified wrote:More or less, but saying you don't understand something isn't a loophole. The real issue here was lack of disclosure. Proper disclosure is needed so that a defendant can "make a full answer and defence," most of which comes from common-law history and the R. v. Stinchcombe case.

The most important statement in that case is:
What are the legal consequences flowing from the failure to disclose? In my opinion, when a court of appeal is called upon to review a failure to disclose, it must consider whether such failure impaired the right to make full answer and defence. This in turn depends on the nature of the information withheld and whether it might have affected the outcome.
The Crown has to give relevant info. In this instance, the real question is how much evidence is in the officer's notes? If mountaineerca gets it typewritten, would the information in the notes "affect the outcome"?
in my opinion, I don't mind the judge or the prosecutor want to do a similar assessment but the key point is this assessment must be done before the trial starts and the decision shall be given to me in advance. otherwise the judge can always deny disclosure to the defendant in the court by saying I assume the disclosure will not make any difference and order the trial to start right away. this is challenge to the justice system of Canada.


mountaineerca
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 7
Joined:

Unread post by mountaineerca on

with my friend's help, I appealed for this case and the application was accepted last week.


User avatar
hwybear
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2933
Joined:
Location: In YOUR rearview mirror!

Moderator

Unread post by hwybear on

CoolChick wrote:Doesn't the law require that any person charged, needs to fully understand the charges against them. ? By that I take it that it means that they (the accused) are to be given all they need in order to obtain that understanding.
Yes, that is why there is standard "short form wordings" that go on the face of the ticket. That is also why the ACT and SECTION are on the face of the ticket. If one does not understand the short form wording, they can look up the act and section.




Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca


Post Reply

Return to “Failing to obey signs”