Ontario Highway Traffic Act

Stanton brings up a good point... you should contact the clerk of the court and tell them that you actually want a "re-opening" and not an "appeal". A re-opening would indeed be a new trial with the officer present, where as the appeal is requesting a new trial for an error at law (which really there are none). So I think the appeal is the wrong ...

Well an appeal will pretty much always be granted. I have never heard of anybody not getting their appeal request approved (as far as provincial offences go).

It could be an entirely different prosecutor at the appeal, and yes they very much could object to the new trial.

However along with your reasons for being late, you should also include the ...

The appeal is not a re-trial and the only evidence reviewed at an appeal is what was brought forward at the original trial. No new evidence can be entered at an appeal.

Since the crown would not re-call your name at the court house, you have been found guilty and convicted of the charge and you will receive the notice in the mail and you MUST pay ...

Good news! Congratulations on the win.

The prosecutor probably reviewed the officers notes and realized that information was missing and decided to drop it.

Well that is good news at least!

I got a response back for my Freedom of Information Request about "tuning fork test requirements removed from radar manuals" and the request has been approved.

However they have to notify a "third party" that was involved, and if this party does not object, then information will be released in January.

So more wait and see!

FOIR-2015-11-26 ...

You can download the full case law here:
R. v. Green, [2004] O.J. No. 5757(QL) (C.J.)
https://copy.com/vekUvtgF8xpNLgx4

I do not see any legislation that specifically requires a Notice of Motion to have an affadavit. There may be something somewhere or it may just be common practice and that is what they expect.

What is an Affadavit: it is a notary swearing that you are who you say you are and that you are saying what is in the affadavit is true.
What is a Sworn ...

As long as it is not a vacation, they should give you a new trial date.

The only time you can enter evidence that will be considered is either while you cross-examine a witness, or when you are testifying yourself. You can not add anything new during your closing submissions that was not mentioned during cross-examination/testimony.

Howerver this does not apply to case law... you do not need to mention case law during ...

Every prosecutor is different. Some will just totally not care about anything you say, and will just want to make you go thru the whole trial so they can try and beat you, whereas others will be totally understanding and may tell you they are going to drop the charge.

But either way, yes you should tell prosecutor you have your witnesses that will ...

If you and at least one of either your mother or brother will testify that you absolutely did stop then you should be able to get it dropped.

If it is only you that testifies against the officer testifying, then most likely they will believe the officer over you, but if you have at least one other person willing to testify the same as you then ...

Okay so the full name of the case mentioned is this:
R. v. Green, [2004] O.J. No. 5757(QL) (C.J.)

This is a lower court (Ontario Court of Justice ruling) which means it is not binding on other JP's (but still worth mentioning and submitting).

Not all cases are reported on CANLII, but they may be available on other "paid for" services that most ...

Yes the other case laws may apply even if it is a different charge. However a quick search on CANLII did not find the text you are mentioning related to an R. v. Green case. Can you post a direct link to the case you are referring too? A Justice of the Peace is not bound to the decisions of other Justice of the Peace in the lower provincial court ...

In this case you should NOT testify and should NOT give your side of the story unless you are 100% prepared to say, without a doubt, that you absolutely stopped. If there is slightest waiver in your testimony then you will convict yourself, so you are probably better to exercise your right not to incriminate yourself and stay off the witness stand ...