No full disclosure provided after 2 court appearance

Hi Everyone,

I got a ticket for not fully stop at a stop sign. I file a NOTICE OF INTENTION TO APPEAR. I requested full disclosure, I got no answer, I fax another request, no response. I went to the Persecutor office; they gave me the officer note but no video. On trial date the persecutor ask for adjournment until they get video disclosure

The second court date no video disclosure, I asked the judge to dismiss the case, since I asked for disclosure numerous time, the Judge asked me to show the persecutor the evidence of my disclosure request, I did. The persecutor interrupts and set a new court date. What are my options? What is your advice for the next step, should I file for 11B motion?

Thank you,

You need to file a charter motion for a section 7 (not 11b). It must be filed at least 15 days before the trial date AND you must notify both the Ontario and Canadian Attorney General's office. Best way to do this (fastest and cheapest) is to fax it (use Staples if you don't have your own fax).

So if you have not received the video 3 weeks before your next trial date, then you should file the motion right away. If they show up with the video by the trial date, then your motion will not succeed and the trial will continue. If they do NOT have the video by the trial date, then it should succeed and charge dropped.

Where can I get charter motion for a section 7 form.

So if you have not received the video 3 weeks before your next trial date, then you should file the motion right away.

Is this 11b?

Thanks

No I am still talking about the section 7 not the 11b. An 11b is charter motion for unreasonable delay (right to speedy trial), meaning your trial took more than 10 months.

I have not filed a section 7 motion before. All I can suggest is that you look at the 11b motion and sort of use that as a guideline on how to do the section 7 one.

Sorry I didn't mention that from the beginning, I got my ticket 13 month ago.

What was the date you requested a trial... the count does not start until you ask for trial, so if you did early resolution first then that does not count.

What is the date of your next court date?

And can you confirm that the first two trials where adjourned because of failure to have disclosure?

What was the date you requested a trial.. June 23rd, 2015

What is the date of your next court date? Aug 4th. 2016

And can you confirm that the first two trials where adjourned because of failure to have disclosure? Correct

Still waiting to be contacted to get video disclosure, Do I file for 11b

Thanks,

So yes it sounds like an 11B would be succesful.

You only have 16 days until trial, and you need to file it 15 days before trial. This means that you MUST file no later than tomorrow (by about 3pm to be safe), and the only way you can do this is the FAX method because if you send it registered mail to attorney generals office then they are not considered notified until they receive it and that would be less than the 15 days required notice.

Now the only other consideration is the dates that the trials were set...

So, as an example, let's say at the first trial was Aug 1, 2015 and at this trial you were offered a new date of Oct 1, 2015 but then YOU said I can not do that, how about Nov 1, 2015. In this case the delay from Aug 1 to Oct 1 would be counted but the delay from Oct 1 to Nov 1 would not be counted as that was YOUR delay. You can only count delays caused by the prosecution, not delays that you caused.

The time requirement is around 10 months, so since it is about 13.5 months total, as long as 3.5 months of delay is not attributed to you, then you should be succesful.

I have personally not filed an 11B before, so maybe somebody else can confirm if you need to have transcripts of the first two trial dates available or not?

I don't know for sure but one would think that the court clerk would have records of the outcomes of each appearance and the reason for the delay.

I did delay it only once from May 11, 2016 to June 13th, 2016, excluding my delay, it will be a total of 13+ month delay caused by the prosecution. The court clerk don't know much about the case, she told I sent the request for disclosure before my trial date, which wasn't true, She didn't know how may disclosure request I sent.

I don't mean the desk clerk, I mean the court clerk in the court room adding notes to the jacket depending on what happens that day.

The court clerk didn't say anyhing. The persecutor ( desk clerk ?) was rushing things, she was trying to confuse me.

They wouldn't say anything but they keep the records of what happened in court. They will write notes on each matter so the justice can know what went before.

The person that works the desk at the office is just an office worker. Sometimes they are extremely helpful and sometimes they are extremely unhelpful.

The "prosecutor" (not the persecutor) is the lawyer that stands up in court to argue against you.

The "clerk of the court" is the person in court that does the recording and reads the charges out.

To clarify further , i am new to all theses

There was 2 person facing the audience, the JP, the clerk of the court clerk ( wearing a gown)

then the prosecutor and myself facing he JP, in my case the prosecutor seems to be a clerk not a lawyer.

Thanks,

Why do you say that ? The Crown Prosecutor is a lawyer.

From here

http://ticketcombat.com/step5/step5.php

I wouldn't pay attention to much of what Ticket Combat has to say. In the latest appointment for JPs in Ontario, quite a few of them were lawyers.

The prosecutor is a lawyer that works for the municipality

as well.

Personally if I was in your situation I would file two motions:

1. 11B under the charter for unreasonable delay

2. section 7 under the charter, failure to provide disclosure

With these two motions it would be extremely hard to believe that crown would continue to proceed, they don't have the time to deal with this much headache and would simply move on to the next case.

Out of curiosity, which courthouse is this?

Observer135 wrote:

Personally if I was in your situation I would file two motions:

1. 11B under the charter for unreasonable delay

2. section 7 under the charter, failure to provide disclosure

With these two motions it would be extremely hard to believe that crown would continue to proceed, they don't have the time to deal with this much headache and would simply move on to the next case.

Ah, the famous jsherk defence.......hey, it's worked for him.

I prepared 11b document, 6 copies form requesting stay of proceeding, stamped by the attorney general of Canada and Ontario, I went to court ( Markham location) stamped by the court office and prosecutor office, I left each one a copy.

I prepared a folder with 6 tabs, notice of application, sworn statement,copy of the ticket, notice of trial, copy of the supreme court of Canada's decision in Askov v. R. , copy of the supreme court of Canada decision in R. v. Morin. The procesutor and the crown knew I am filing 11b.

The JP ask me If 11b is not accepted, am I ready for a trial, I said no since I didn't receive a video disclosure. I explain that this is my third court apperance with no disclosure the crown is delaying the proceeding since they didn't provide a disclosure. Also they needed me to have 3 copies of the folder, one for JP , one for Procesutor and another one for myself

JP asked me if I have a transcript of previsous court apperance, I said no. JP didn't accept the motion, to make thing worst the officer showed up with the video. So the trial is adjoured again.

I went to the court office to get a transcipt , it will cost about $150 to get three copies of the transcript. I am screwed either way.

Yes I think JP needs previous transcripts in order to calculate the time and make sure that it took too long.

You can still file another 11b for the next court appearance, you just need the transcripts from all previous appearances and the one you just had.

This will help your 11b though since the delay is again because the prosecution only provided you the disclosure at this last appearance, so you still need time to prepare. But if you were at the 11b time frame already, then even if this last delay is not counted against, you should still win next time (as long as you have copies of transcripts).

Did they give you a copy of video or only let you watch it? In my opinion, if they did not give you a copy, then they still have not fulfilled their obligation to disclose it to you.

jsherk wrote:

Did they give you a copy of video or only let you watch it? In my opinion, if they did not give you a copy, then they still have not fulfilled their obligation to disclose it to you.

I would agree with this.

They did gave me a copy fo the video, as well as I watched with the prosecutor. If the JP don't accept 11b, then I will have to go to trial on the spot, they what I was told last time.

There is a risk , I will have to pay $$$ for the transcripts which is more than the ticket itself, and there is no guarrantee.

There will probably be an increase in insurance that will cost more than the trsanscripts. And yes true, there is never a guanrantee. But win or lose, I always look at it as "investing in my legal education".

You could always take a law course and not waste taxpayers money ?

Its the government that is wasting the taxpayers money, not those that are standing up to fight for their rights (innocent until proven guilty, right to a fair trial).

How is the government wasting money if 'they' are laying charges that are correct. The concept of innocent until proven guilty is supposed to protect the innocent. If you know you committed the offence yet play games with the court process to try to get off then it is absolutely you that is wasting the tax payers resources.

Same argument round and round... If they were actually charging people with real crimes or things that were actually unsafe, then that would be one thing. But when the majority of provincial offences are paperwork crimes or pre-crime then those are not really crimes at all, and are simply revenue generation.

The concept of innocent until proven guilty is exactly that... you are not guilty of anything until it has been proven.