Search found 358 matches

The signage at this intersection is ridiculous. I'm surprised there aren't accidents every day there.

The yield sign facing southbound drivers means they must yield right of way to all oncoming traffic and may not proceed into the intersection until it is safe to do so. Any northbound drivers who have come to a complete stop have right of way over ...

When in doubt, I'll always stop. I'd rather be wrong or let someone else be wrong and not have an accident than be right and wind up with a dented car.

When a U-turn is permitted in an intersection with a protected left turn arrow (a situation that is now very common in my area with the installation over the past few years of bus lanes down the ...

Amen! Too many people park themselves in the left lane and block everyone.

"We have these things called necks." Brilliant!!!

You entered the intersection. Once you cross the solid stop line, you have entered the intersection. That line will always be either even with or before the end of the median or the concrete curb.

The officer's notes show he's a qualified LIDAR operator and he tested the unit both before and after enforcement. I hate to say it, but the case against you is pretty rock-solid. Traffic was light, so the officer is not likely to have confused your car with another. The officer states he never lost sight of you. On the upside, he did say you were ...

It would depend on how backed up the court is. The only time I ever went this route, it took about a month. That was several years ago in Richmond Hill.

Points are irrelevant for insurance purposes. Insurance companies treat 49 km/h over the limit as a minor offence, just as if you'd only been 15 over the limit. If you're not planning to buy a car now, why delay the conviction on your record? You should probably want the effect to come off as soon as possible.

It's also not likely you'll get a ...

Maybe. If the JP is sympathetic, he or she may toss it; however, that's more likely to happen if you're there. Without you there, the JP may give the prosecution another chance.

If the charge is withdrawn, you may receive a notice of that in the mail. If not, you will receive a notice of the new trial date. I would suggest you call the court ...

If it happens again, I would object vehemently. You've been prepared to proceed, but the officer and prosecution haven't been. Really, the charge should have been withdrawn this time.

According to the sources I checked, the offence would be considered minor. I couldn't find one that suggested being in a construction zone would make it a major offence, but am willing to defer to definitive information otherwise.

You have every right to request a trial, request disclosure, see what evidence the Crown has against you, etc. Right ...

There's nothing wrong with requesting a trial. The Crown still has to prove its case. You can request disclosure to see the evidence the police officer plans to present. This is a difficult charge to beat; a driver can only turn left legally when it is safe to do so.

You probably should go. As Decatur said, if the date that's offered doesn't work, you'll have to go back and request another adjournment.

You can also raise the issue of disclosure. Keep following up between now and then. The prosecutor may have the disclosure on the motion date and may provide it to you. If not, the JP could issue an order giving ...

There's also the risk, albeit slim, of a trespassing charge for being on private property without a valid reason to be at the school or in the parking lot.

If you've started your turn or are otherwise about to pass the school bus, the driver should wait until you have passed before putting on the lights and putting out the stop sign. Alternatively, the driver should realize that you're too close to stop but that everyone else will stop.

At the trial, explain how long you waited for disclosure and that you had just received it. Ask for an adjournment to give you time to prepare a full answer and defence. Also ask that the adjournment be noted as attributable to the Crown. It's not your fault it took five months.

If you've requested disclosure and have actively followed up but do not receive it by the trial date, the court will likely adjourn the trial to allow time for disclosure. That delay will be attributable to the Crown. If you continue to follow up actively and disclosure hasn't been provided by the second appearance, the prosecutor will likely ...

I agree with you entirely. The prosecutor, however, would say you're responsible for what's there. I still wish you luck. You may find someone with some compassion.

Your analysis and defence would be great except for the renewal of the sticker. If I were the prosecutor, I would wonder how diligent you were in checking the address, plate number, etc., on the permit and would argue that you should have noticed the discrepancy. At that point, you should have tried to set things straight.

On the other hand...if ...

Unless you can prove the unit was malfunctioning (and that's almost impossible to do), it will be deemed to be working properly. You're going to have to find a better defence than "I know I wasn't driving that quickly." Your best chance is that the officer's notes don't document start- and end-of-shift tests of the unit.

You don't want an extension of time and you don't want to appeal. You want to have the matter reopened (that's a much easier process). Go to the court as quickly as possible and ask for the form to have the matter reopened. You will have to explain why you want it reopened; just say that your paralegal failed to show up.

You should also contact ...

All driving in Ontario is governed by the HTA, so she will have to comply with all provisions of the Act, including having you or someone else who's eligible riding beside her. She also has to be 16 (I know some states allow people as young as 14 or 15 to have learner permits; I could probably look up Connecticut's age, but just make sure she's 16).

The owner will have to pay, as the conviction will be in his, her or its name, but you should, of course, offer to reimburse the owner. A conviction of the owner does not affect anyone's driving record as no driver has been identified or convicted. There are no insurance implications.

Differences between handwritten notes and electronic notes are meaningless. Notes are simply that; they are not evidence.

If you can poke holes in the spotter's story (you hadn't been stopped, ask how he identified that you were holding a cellphone, what type of phone he thinks he saw, etc.), you may have a chance.

In the Fernandes-Salema case, the defendant actually held the phone, that is, had it in his hand. In my friend's case, he simply pushed a button to answer a call without actually holding it. To both him and me, the question remains how courts define "placed securely."

Thanks, FyreStorm. Do you have a case name? I've been going crazy trying to find one.

You may be able to get the first one reduced, but probably not enough to eliminate the points (maybe bring it down to two). If the second one hasn't already been reduced, you may be able to get that one reduced as well to 65 to eliminate the points, especially if it comes up sufficiently quickly after the first one that the prosecutor doesn't "see ...

Hi everyone. I'm asking for a friend who has a question of interpretation.

He was ticketed for using a hand-held device. He contends that he was acting within the exemption provided under Subsection 14 (1) of O. Reg. 366/09, which reads as follows (emphasis added):

Exemption for pressing buttons
14. (1) A person may drive a motor vehicle on a ...

Maybe there's an argument that the speed recorded was your friend's, but the officer's notes make it clear that you were both travelling approximately the same speed consistently. If you can get a deal at 49 over, you should consider yourself fortunate, especially given that you had just been convicted of driving 20 over the limit.

If you get a ...

Is part of the shoulder paved? Subsection 150 (3) allows a driver to pass in the manner you did when the vehicle ahead is turning left or the driver has signalled an intention to turn left and the shoulder is paved. If some of it is, you may be able to raise the argument that you reasonably believed the rest of the shoulder would be.

If you have a receipt for payment, you'll be fine. No one's going to refund your payment and put you in default.