Ontario Highway Traffic Act

In almost all jurisdictions, you'll get your disclosure handed to you just as you walk in for your meeting with the Prosecutor---without even having to ask for it. In fact, many jurisdictions will withdraw the charge if the disclosure is NOT available at the time since no meaningful resolution discussions could be had without either side having the ...

1) They're not going to withdraw a 44 over ticket unless there's a screw up that can't be fixed. If you're a 1st time offender, they might offer you 29 over (at best). If so, I'd take the deal since it will only be 3 points and much cheaper of a fine. Its still a conviction but lets face it, are you really going to be able to get acquitted on a 44 ...

The onus is on the defendant to establish why something not disclosed must be disclosed; it is not for the Crown to justify its decision otherwise. The Stinchcombe obligation only states that the Crown must disclose that which is relevant and within its control to the case. For things it does not disclose, the defendant is the one who bears the ...

"Take it to trial. Insist it wasn't 8am yet by your watch."

Highwaystar, I'm not sure this site is about advising people to purger themselves. The OP said he believed it was 8 or after.

Thanks for mentioning this Argyll. I can see how my comments could lead one to think I'm suggesting they commit perjury. That was never my intent. I certainly ...

Take it to trial. Insist it wasn't 8am yet by your watch.

The officer likely will not make notes about how he tested his clock or watch and when it was last calibrated. So, you can raise doubt that the actual time was actually 7:57am (for example) and therefore you didn't commit the act. A thorough cross-examination on the validity of the officer ...

Technically speaking, the manual is hearsay evidence since it was written by someone else and they are not in court to testify on the document. That is, no one is there to 'authenticate' the document as having been written by them, not having been altered, etc.

However, you can always employ a 'side-way' evidence strategy so that the JP at least ...

Judicial notice can only be made on such facts that are so well-known that they are indisputable by anyone and therefore common knowledge. For instance, if water goes below zero degrees, it freezes. That's pretty common knowledge. However, saying that water always freezes outside in January is not an indisputable fact because while more than likely ...

Unfortunately, its not possible to make a general statement that all private property is not considered a 'highway' under the HTA. There are several examples of 'private' locations such as mall parking lots which have been designated 'highways' by by-law, making them subject to the HTA. Usually that is in very busy places like some spots of ...

Case law is generally submitted at the end of the case when the parties are making their final submissions. However, there may be times during a proceeding where case law may also need to be introduced. For example, when a motion or application is being made (i.e. at the start of the case or during the proceeding) or during a 'voir dire' (a trial ...

Unfortunately, your boyfriend's stuck in a legal uncertainty. You see, several courts have held that citing the wrong section number with a conflicting offence description IS a fatal flaw. See the case of R.v.Stuparayk and Firmino .

However, the Ontario Court of Appeal has also permitted leave to appeal in another case because a different case ...

Actually, the officer absolutely needs to attend. Only they can properly identify you. Without that, the prosecutor fails to meet its case. Its weird that someone would even suggest that the officer is not essential; its not possible to prove the case otherwise since it fails on the ID element.
I don't want to distribute misinformation within the ...

It all depends on how much the prosecutor believes from you. After all, are they really going to believe that you were in the process of overtaking the truck? More likely, they are going to think that you were actually driving straight through and would have continued to do so, but for the accident. However, if the prosecutor buys your story that ...

Section 148(5) deals with overtaking cars. Its aim is actually to require that you pass on the left. However, prosecutors commonly use that section as a means to negotiate down from careless driving or follow too closely interpreting it as a 'lane change' section as oppose to an 'overtaking' section. Unfortunately though, many jurisdictions ...

First off, if you're already at trial, its because you didn't take any offer----pretty risky move on your part. However, if you ARE at trial and neither officer shows up, then the prosecutor can't make out their case since they can't properly identify you. If they don't get an adjournment, then the case will undoubtedly be dismissed at that point ...

Actually, the officer absolutely needs to attend. Only they can properly identify you. Without that, the prosecutor fails to meet its case. Its weird that someone would even suggest that the officer is not essential; its not possible to prove the case otherwise since it fails on the ID element.

By the way, the prosecutor will only offer you Fail ...