Search found 380 matches

Gee, you really got yourself into a sticky situation there.

From the notes, I get the following:

You were driving southbound in L1 of Poppy Hills (a 2 lane road). You were driving a 2 door black 2008 Mitsubishi.
The officer used a Laser device. He locked you in at 85 km/h at a distance of 88.67 meters. You were the only motor vehicle in the laser's path at the time.
He stopped you south of Cottrelle. You ...

The Yan decision still applies. However, I'd be quite surprised if there is still any Ontario jurisdiction who hasn't implemented those requirements on their photographs.

Keep in mind that the "location" does not need to be set out by name, but rather is done by setting out the municipal codes as per the regulations. It is usually on Line 2 under ...

you did not anwer my question the police was not there so is it mandatory

Officers don't have to witness an incident themselves to lay a charge. They can do so based upon other evidence, such as witnesses, accident reconstructions, video, etc.

Generally, if you hit a pedestrian at a cross-walk, the driver is charged since the pedestrian has ...

Amending up happens ALL the time. Its not just a threat. The reason most of the cases end up resolved is because the defendant generally realizes it will cost them A LOT more if they lose and either pay the fine before court starts or plead guilty. Once they do the math, defendants generally want to resolve it quickly before the prosecutor gets the ...

It costs $3.20 per page. The only way to avoid getting the transcripts would be to get the Prosecution to concede in writing that the delays were indeed due to their acts/omissions (quite unlikely!). Otherwise, as iFly55 stated, you will need them to corroborate your argument.

Unless the court requests the transcripts itself, there is a cost. As for your question, its unclear what the purpose of the adjournment was. If the court determines the adjournment was due to the Crown's actions, then the delay will count against them for delay. However, if it was due to your acts and/or omissions, then it will count against you ...

I would just pay the ticket. You don't want those facts put on a public record. Think about it, the prosecutor will undoubtedly ask about what was found in the car, including drug paraphernalia and a weapon----and that will become part of permanent record that COULD be used against you in the future---especially you were to ever later say you've ...

OPP officers definitely show up for court, especially if they have multiple charges the same day. Many times the same officer will have pulled over multiple cars that day for similar offences so the same trial date is often used for all defendants from that shift who requested a trial. This avoids the officer having to attend court multiple dates ...

I think you should focus on mounting a defense instead of wasting time with an 11b application. I would be extremely surprised if your application succeeds, especially since you are going to have a hard time establishing that you were 'ready for trial' when you didn't even request disclosure. Plus, you'll have a difficult time establishing ...

A lot of critical dates/concerns are missing in your summary for anyone to be able to actually give you any meaningful analysis. It appears that you are only concerning yourself with the time between offence date and trial date. However, 11b applications involve doing quite a bit of assessing as to the time elapsed at the different stages of the ...

Congratulations. I'm glad it worked out for you.

Chances are very slim that they'll drop it to only 15 over (i.e. no points). I would expect that they will only drop it to 20 over at most (i.e. a 3 point, minor infraction for insurance purposes). Its too large a drop to reduce it by 15km, so its extremely rare to be offered. After all, prosecutors need to balance court resources vs. devaluing the ...

It can be reduced to "Start from stopped position--not in safety" {section 142(2)} which only carries 2 points. If they don't automatically offer it at the resolution meeting, then you should suggest it.

In fail to stop cases where the officer is the only witness, then if the officer doesn't attend court, the charge is generally dismissed since the prosecution has no evidence to call. If the officer's nonattendance is unexpected (i.e. officer's ill, family death or has a personal emergency) then an adjournment is usually granted. However, if their ...

You certainly can hire a professional and take the case all the way to trial. No one is going to force you to accept a plea (i.e. to a lesser charge). After all, its your constitutional right to put the Crown/Prosecution's case to the test (i.e. presumption of innocence).

So, if you want to go to trial, simply retain a professional and instruct ...

Generally, a copy can only be a "true copy" when it is notarized by a Notary Public. In fact, that is one of the primary functions of notaries.

Still, as some have stated, the HTA does not define the term "true copy" and therefore the interpretation rules must go in favour of the defendant. If the legislators wanted it to be notarized or certified ...

It is going to be a bit hard to win your case since you are the one making the left turn at the intersection and must ensure it is safe to do so before proceeding. As you mentioned, it was very snowy, so the other driver can simply state that they tried to stop but were sliding through the intersection due to the heavy snow.

Now, that doesn't mean ...

On a side note: you should visit a lawyer with regards to the accident. You MAY have a claim against the city for it not properly cleaning/maintaining the snow (as they are required). However, section 44(10) of the Municipal Act requires that you place the city on notice within 10 days of the incident---so, you gotta act fast.

Yikes---you with your 3 posts (and only joining yesterday!) are calling ME out for being some troll. I guess you don't like hearing the truth. Presumably, you didn't check out the video at the 21 second mark where you're just 'timing' your left turn on the basis that the car continues at the same speed just before you get hit by the other guy! I ...

Why do you think you're not at fault for everything? You made an unsafe left turn and/or failed to yield. YOU are making a left turn on to a road where others have the right of way. You almost hit the first car's rear, plus, clearly your turn can't be said to have been made in safety because other driver's had to take steps to avoid a collision. In ...

In order for a motion to quash to be considered, there are procedural documents/forms that need to be filed (in advance) and served upon the federal and provincial government. That's because, failure to provide disclosure is a constitutional issue. One therefore needs to follow the procedures for doing a charter application (much like an 11b ...

Your son needs to put the request in writing to the Prosecutor's office----fax, email and mail it. In other words, have a paper trail of his requests---not just phone calls!

Then, on the court date, your son needs to put it on the record in court that he has not yet received disclosure and explain the steps he's taken thus far to get it. The JP ...

viper1 wrote:Maybe you should add:

" Now, if only I could merge the 2 lobes of my brain to work together! " to your sig lol.

Look at mine for a laugh.

Cheers
Viper1

That's a good idea. I just did it. Cheers!

1) I don't see anything in the OP to indicate the driver is suspended.
2) Mom wasn't in the car. The officer called her.

Thanks for your reply Decatur---I just realized I've been posting in the wrong thread! My previous comments were geared to another Op------I merged the threads in my mind! Oddly enough, my comments wouldn't have made sense on ...

Are you just trolling? I mean, you can't possibly be THAT stupid, can you?

Let's recap:
1) You were driving while 'DOUBLY' suspended;
2) BUT, not just driving ---instead you're going at LEAST 40 over (i.e. a great way not to draw attention to yourself!);
3) PLUS, you're doing all of this with your own MOM in the car!

And, now, you've actually ...

Out of curiosity though, what's to stop all officers from just exagerating charges, then knocking them down at the scene to blackmail people into going straight for the plea of guilt?

1) Courts----we don't live in a corrupt country; every case can be tested before an impartial court;
2) Legal professionals---they are trained to bring to surface ...

Unfortunately, you were charged correctly. It will be extremely difficult for you to fight given that you were making the left turn in the intersection. The fact that the other driver had his signal on does not justify you to assume anything. He could have simply forgot his signal or intended to turn further down. It was an error on your judgement ...

It seems like you don't have a very good grasp of the laws and procedures. You might therefore wish to retain a local paralegal or traffic lawyer to help you. It will also spare you having to come to court (if you're in the US).

To clarify then, your steps should be:
1) Request a trial;
2) Request disclosure and see if there is any evidence to ...

Sorry to say but holding the phone (regardless of purpose) is enough to convict. The Court of Appeal clarified that issue in the Kazemi decision just last September.

You'll therefore need to find a fatal error on the ticket, hope the officer doesn't show up for trial, or the officer isn't believed in court (especially if your statements are ...