The other night I was turning from a neighborhood road onto a relatively major street late at night. There was no traffic on any street. About a mile up the road I was pulled over when I turned into a gas station. I was told thatI did not completely stop before turning right on red which I did not agree with but that is besides the point. When getting the ticket I was charged under section 144(19) for failing to yield. Despite subsection ( 18 ) and subject to subsection (14), a driver, after stopping his or her vehicle and yielding the right of way to traffic lawfully approaching so closely that to proceed would constitute an immediate hazard, may, (a) turn to the right; or (b) turn to the left from a one-way street into a one-way street, without a green indication being shown. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 144 (19). My interpretation of this is that the office claims by this charge my failure to yield caused a hazard which is not the case. Does it seem as if I have a case due to being charged incorrectly?
The other night I was turning from a neighborhood road onto a relatively major street late at night. There was no traffic on any street. About a mile up the road I was pulled over when I turned into a gas station. I was told thatI did not completely stop before turning right on red which I did not agree with but that is besides the point. When getting the ticket I was charged under section 144(19) for failing to yield.
Despite subsection ( 18 ) and subject to subsection (14), a driver, after stopping his or her vehicle and yielding the right of way to traffic lawfully approaching so closely that to proceed would constitute an immediate hazard, may,
(a) turn to the right; or
(b) turn to the left from a one-way street into a one-way street,
without a green indication being shown. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 144 (19).
My interpretation of this is that the office claims by this charge my failure to yield caused a hazard which is not the case. Does it seem as if I have a case due to being charged incorrectly?
The key point in there is the "failure to stop" part of it. There may have been no traffic at all, and it may have been perfectly safe to make the right turn without coming to a full stop - but - it is illegal. Even in that situation, legally, you're required to bring the vehicle to a complete stop before turning. So no, unfortunately, you were not charged incorrectly if the officer believes that you did not stop completely. Forward motion of the vehicle must cease completely. Where was the officer when you made the turn? Was he behind you, approaching from another direction...?
The key point in there is the "failure to stop" part of it. There may have been no traffic at all, and it may have been perfectly safe to make the right turn without coming to a full stop - but - it is illegal. Even in that situation, legally, you're required to bring the vehicle to a complete stop before turning. So no, unfortunately, you were not charged incorrectly if the officer believes that you did not stop completely.
Despite subsection ( 18 ) and subject to subsection (14), a driver, after stopping his or her vehicle and
Forward motion of the vehicle must cease completely.
Where was the officer when you made the turn? Was he behind you, approaching from another direction...?
I honestly did not see where the officer was at all. He pulled me over far up the road when i pulled into a gas station and questioned me thoroughly. The issue I was wondering is that he did not charge me with failure to stop but fo failure to yield. my understanding of the section was that this applies if I had stopped then dangerously pulled out in front of someone. Am I wrong in this interpretation
I honestly did not see where the officer was at all. He pulled me over far up the road when i pulled into a gas station and questioned me thoroughly. The issue I was wondering is that he did not charge me with failure to stop but fo failure to yield. my understanding of the section was that this applies if I had stopped then dangerously pulled out in front of someone. Am I wrong in this interpretation
if you don't know where the officer was...maybe you pulled out in front of the cruiser and hit had to change lanes or something? Ask for disclosure and it will give you more insight, rather than you and others on here trying to answer if the offence applies without all the details
if you don't know where the officer was...maybe you pulled out in front of the cruiser and hit had to change lanes or something?
Ask for disclosure and it will give you more insight, rather than you and others on here trying to answer if the offence applies without all the details
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
Disclosure is where you get all of the relevant evidence against you so that you can answer the charge and provide a full defence to it. So the Crown is "disclosing" all of its evidence to you... actually to be technical... it is all of the evidence that has a reasonable possibility of affecting the outcome of the trial. In this case, when the officer stopped you, he would have made notes about the incident. You should get a copy of his notes and a photocopy of the front and back of the ticket in this case. The notes should tell you (probably in point form) what he observed, where the offence occurred, that he followed you to the gas station without losing sight of your vehicle, and then stopped and charged you, etc. It is what he observed that is critical - did he see you not stop, or did he see you pull out in front of another vehicle? Take a look at this website for more information, including stuff about disclosure: www.ticketcombat.com
Disclosure is where you get all of the relevant evidence against you so that you can answer the charge and provide a full defence to it. So the Crown is "disclosing" all of its evidence to you... actually to be technical... it is all of the evidence that has a reasonable possibility of affecting the outcome of the trial.
In this case, when the officer stopped you, he would have made notes about the incident. You should get a copy of his notes and a photocopy of the front and back of the ticket in this case. The notes should tell you (probably in point form) what he observed, where the offence occurred, that he followed you to the gas station without losing sight of your vehicle, and then stopped and charged you, etc. It is what he observed that is critical - did he see you not stop, or did he see you pull out in front of another vehicle?
Take a look at this website for more information, including stuff about disclosure:
Is there any other way to word the charge on the ticket for that section? POA Reg. 950 only lists the 'fail to yield' wording. An alternative is 'red light - fail to stop' but I think 144 (19) also fits, despite the wording on the ticket.
Is there any other way to word the charge on the ticket for that section? POA Reg. 950 only lists the 'fail to yield' wording. An alternative is 'red light - fail to stop' but I think 144 (19) also fits, despite the wording on the ticket.
I got a speeding ticket on the 401 by Cornwall. The officer said I was going 140 initially then dropped it to 130 (for the record I don't believe for a second I was going 140, that's way faster than I would ever intentionally drive). I filled out the info on the back of the notice to request a…
I was recently charged with stunt driving on a 60kmh road. When I was pulled over, the officer told me I was going almost 100kmh (still 40kmh above the limit) but was charging me for stunt driving because I accelerated quickly from an intersection on an empty road (in a straight line). I know…
what to do about a an illegal right turn onto steeles from staines rd
got the ticket around october of last year
put it to trial
so there is a big mess of cars at this intersection and I see a cop outside standing directing traffic with a huge row of cars pulled over to the side, through…
Are any non-domestic vehicles "pursuit-rated" in North America? Also have the Michigan State Police (this is relevant because apparently they have the most accepted selection/testing process) tested any of them to see if they meet their criteria? Just curious...
Ottawa, Canada (AHN) - Beginning Tuesday, or April Fool's Day 2008, fines on Quebec drivers caught overspeeding will be doubled. It is not only the money penalty that will go up, but also demerit points.
The new law, Bill 42, is similar to Ontario's street racing rule. It stipulates fines for…
A friend got a ticket Jan. 9th of this year for doing 110 kph in a 90 kph zone, so 20 over.
What should the set fine and total payable read?
It's confusing to me, as the prescribed fine under HTA s.128 is different than the set fine enumerated by the Chief Justice of the Ontario Court of Justice.
An OPP officer ticketed me claiming I was going 40km/h over the limit (140km/km) on my way home with a few friends on the 401. This is my first ever speeding offense. Although I am sure I was over the limit, I am almost certain that I was not going 40 over, more realistically closer to 30 over. The…
Yesterday night I was charged for stunt driving (excess over 50km/h) and I have a few inquiries. I'm sure you've all heard the same story, but the unmarked cop in an SUV was tailing me for a good 2-3 minutes as I was travelling 120~135 km/h. Then as he came close I decided to boot it up…
I had a speeding ticket in May 2013 which brought me to 9 demerit points out of 15. I received a letter and had to attend an interview. Due to a history of speeding tickets and a previous interview a few years prior, the interviewer decided to put me on zero tolerance for a year. Meaning if I…