@daggx - good catch!

Yes a missing location is a fatal error. However in order to beat the fatal error you must NOT go to trial because they can fix/amend the error once the trial starts.

What I would do is fax a letter to both the prosecutor and the clerk ASAP. In the letter I would say this:

"With regards to my ticket#123ABC , it has come to my attention that there is no location on my ticket and that this is a fatal error and the ticket should be quashed. Therefore I will not be attending trial tomorrow. Thank you."

If you show up for trial they will fix it, so do not go.

Two things could happen...

(i) The JP will see the error of missing location and quash the ticket and you dont have to worry about it anymore.

(ii) The JP will not see the error and will convict based on "deemed not to dispute the ticket". If this happens then you need to file an appeal based on the JP making an error at law. You then show up to the appeal with the copy of your ticket and tell Judge that the JP should have quashed it because there is no location on it. Make sure you file an APPEAL and not a REOPENING. You will have to pay the fine to file the appeal. Once the appeal is heard, you will get your money back.

So if you do not go tomorrow, then you can call clerk next Wednesday or Thursday to see what happened.

forevergone wrote:

I called the City court house and at this point they advised me to submit a notion for a earlier court appearance to make a request with the JP for adjournment of the trial date. Does this make sense? I can only submit a notion for trial date adjournment only once?

Some Ontario courts will permit an administrative adjournment for a FIRST court date. In other courts, or for second or later court dates, a proper motion must be filed and spoken to. The motion is filed upon the court and the Prosecutor's Office and is generally spoken to in advance of the court date. Generally filing for a motion most been done at least a week before the proposed motion date (check with the local court clerks for their timeline).

First motions are generally granted. Second motion to adjourn may be granted if there is a good reason. Third or later adjournments, you should expect the presiding Justice to be very direct with you on the reasons for your adjournment which may or may not be granted.

jsherk wrote:

@daggx - good catch!

Yes a missing location is a fatal error. However in order to beat the fatal error you must NOT go to trial because they can fix/amend the error once the trial starts.

What I would do is fax a letter to both the prosecutor and the clerk ASAP. In the letter I would say this:

"With regards to my ticket#123ABC , it has come to my attention that there is no location on my ticket and that this is a fatal error and the ticket should be quashed. Therefore I will not be attending trial tomorrow. Thank you."

If you show up for trial they will fix it, so do not go.

Two things could happen...

(i) The JP will see the error of missing location and quash the ticket and you dont have to worry about it anymore.

(ii) The JP will not see the error and will convict based on "deemed not to dispute the ticket". If this happens then you need to file an appeal based on the JP making an error at law. You then show up to the appeal with the copy of your ticket and tell Judge that the JP should have quashed it because there is no location on it. Make sure you file an APPEAL and not a REOPENING. You will have to pay the fine to file the appeal. Once the appeal is heard, you will get your money back.

So if you do not go tomorrow, then you can call clerk next Wednesday or Thursday to see what happened.

Most excellent! Thank you for detailing the outcomes and thank you to @daggx for discovering the error. I owe you a drink on me sometime, seriously!

So interesting revelation just now. The original ticket does show the location but the disclosure document ticket doesn't. Do I still have a valid case of a fatal error or no?

Advice greatly appreciated!! Need to know if I have to show up in court tomorrow. I already faxed a memo saying the ticket associated with the disclosure was missing a location.

Here is the original ticket:

Ah okay... so the location is on your Notice of Offence, so it is NOT a fatal error. This defense will not work for you.

Ok, looks like I'm going back to court tomorrow. Thank you. Will the memo I sent earlier about the fatal error notice be used against me?

No. But when you check in with the prosecutor you can explain why you sent it and why you thought it was a fatal error but then realized it was not.

Ok, thanks jsherk. I'll report back after tomorrow's trial.

Have a good weekend!

If I show up tomorrow in court, am I able to seek further legal representation down the road if I get an adjournment granted? Or am I the only one allowed to defend my father at this point forward?

jsherk wrote:

@daggx - good catch!

Yes a missing location is a fatal error. However in order to beat the fatal error you must NOT go to trial because they can fix/amend the error once the trial starts.

What I would do is fax a letter to both the prosecutor and the clerk ASAP. In the letter I would say this:

"With regards to my ticket#123ABC , it has come to my attention that there is no location on my ticket and that this is a fatal error and the ticket should be quashed. Therefore I will not be attending trial tomorrow. Thank you."

If you show up for trial they will fix it, so do not go.

Two things could happen...

(i) The JP will see the error of missing location and quash the ticket and you dont have to worry about it anymore.

(ii) The JP will not see the error and will convict based on "deemed not to dispute the ticket". If this happens then you need to file an appeal based on the JP making an error at law. You then show up to the appeal with the copy of your ticket and tell Judge that the JP should have quashed it because there is no location on it. Make sure you file an APPEAL and not a REOPENING. You will have to pay the fine to file the appeal. Once the appeal is heard, you will get your money back.

So if you do not go tomorrow, then you can call clerk next Wednesday or Thursday to see what happened.

not sure why above did that...

It used to work if you object before anything spoken.

I was just wondering if that still goes?

(I had a ticket for whatever amount from: cop saying I was going 120 mph and you going way faster..he present)

I object before

they threw it out.

Just wondering why that not work?

Cheers

Viper1

Update:

Going into this, I knew what my options were.

A. If the cop wasn't there, I would proceed to trial

B. If the cop was there,

i. Plead guilty for a lower fine

ii. Ask for an adjournment because I didn't have the in car video yet that was part of the disclosure

I looked at the trial list and found that the our ticket was the only one that day for the officer, so I thought I had a good chance that he was going to be a no show. I scouted for the officer and didn't find him at first, but realized that officers in attendance aren't neccesarily in uniform (I know, stupid assumption by me). When it came my turn for trial, the prosecutor informed me the cop was in attendance. We decided to accept the plea bargain as it was a pretty good reduction. We got it down to $120 + 25 victim surcharge instead of the $490.

Thanks for everyone's help

Well at least there was a reduction. Congratulations on following thru to the end.

forevergone wrote:

Update:

Going into this, I knew what my options were.

A. If the cop wasn't there, I would proceed to trial

B. If the cop was there,

i. Plead guilty for a lower fine

ii. Ask for an adjournment because I didn't have the in car video yet that was part of the disclosure

I looked at the trial list and found that the our ticket was the only one that day for the officer, so I thought I had a good chance that he was going to be a no show. I scouted for the officer and didn't find him at first, but realized that officers in attendance aren't neccesarily in uniform (I know, stupid assumption by me). When it came my turn for trial, the prosecutor informed me the cop was in attendance. We decided to accept the plea bargain as it was a pretty good reduction. We got it down to $120 + 25 victim surcharge instead of the $490.

Thanks for everyone's help

Hi,

How did they reduce the fine? That's all i'm wondering. I have to fight my ticket on Tuesday but I'm going for early resolution

bachodi wrote:

forevergone wrote:

Update:

Going into this, I knew what my options were.

A. If the cop wasn't there, I would proceed to trial

B. If the cop was there,

i. Plead guilty for a lower fine

ii. Ask for an adjournment because I didn't have the in car video yet that was part of the disclosure

I looked at the trial list and found that the our ticket was the only one that day for the officer, so I thought I had a good chance that he was going to be a no show. I scouted for the officer and didn't find him at first, but realized that officers in attendance aren't neccesarily in uniform (I know, stupid assumption by me). When it came my turn for trial, the prosecutor informed me the cop was in attendance. We decided to accept the plea bargain as it was a pretty good reduction. We got it down to $120 + 25 victim surcharge instead of the $490.

Thanks for everyone's help

Hi,

How did they reduce the fine? That's all i'm wondering. I have to fight my ticket on Tuesday but I'm going for early resolution

The JP sets the fine. If the defendant and prosecutor agree to a guilty plea with a reduced fine amount, they will make what is called a "joint submissions" where they both recommend the same fine to the JP. He can still ignore it though and impose whatever fine within the allowed ranges. Usually they accept the joint submission though.