Search found 46 matches

I'd still try to talk to the police officer or the prosecution. If you're a G1 driver, assuming you got it right at the beginning, you're only 16 or 17 years old, so they may just withdraw the charge, they're human after all. They're under no obligation to do so but charging a 16 year old for forgetting his license when driving when his mother ...

Yeah, they can amend the ticket to reflect the actual charges. Even if your ticket was actually the wrong location (like the wrong street all together), I think it's a difficult case to make unless you could have actually proved that you were never on that street with that vehicle. I don't think the wrong street is a fatal error anyway though, so ...

Thank you again everyone...I'm still deciding on the appeal route and if I will take it. I'm writing up the stuff I would need to submit so if I do choose appeal, I will be ready. I think I will prepare everything then get a consult from a professional and see what they think, if it's worth it or not. I cannot thank you enough for your help from ...

Does early resolution count toward the insititual delay for 11b?

Nope. It's considered a neutral intake period.

That's not conclusive, it's been debated.

R. v. Jair, 2013 ONCJ 142

19. Ms. Penkow argued that the 5 month delay for the Early Resolution Meeting rests at Ms. Jairs feet. I do not agree with that argument. In Andrade, supra, at ...

While it is true that careless driver is a bit harder of a conviction to obtain simply because they have to prove that you were driving at a departure from the standard of care... I would probably suggest hiring a paralegal.

Although, in theory - it's easier to get off careless driving as opposed to say, a speeding ticket. The amount of legal ...

Someone is simply implying to take advantage, or abide by the rights given to a person. Your suggestion implies that by using the rights awarded to you, police are going to use more intrusive methods to violate your rights... Lastly, you conclude by suggesting that you should pick your battles, otherwise inferring that by deciding not to have your ...

In reply to a few of Sonics comments,
The police do not have access to any database that will tell them if a vehicle or driver are insured. The reason you may see some drivers charged with failing to have a valid insurance card is that this offence can be laid against the driver of the motor vehicle.
A charge of driving without insurance can only ...

Say this once in law school, I dare you...

Is there a point to be made here, or are we just going to lower ourselves to one liners? Feel free to discuss. It's a forum.

Someone is simply implying to take advantage, or abide by the rights given to a person. Your suggestion implies that by using the rights awarded to you, police are going to ...

There's numerous instances where the Supreme Court has overruled and/or declared it's own rulings outdated. 20 years ago, it may have been necessary to stop every single car to check insurance, but advancements in technology can make it possible to check insurance without having to stop the vehicle today. Therefore, there is validation to the ...

And get the Supreme Court to reverse its earlier decision which already said it's okay? Don't bet on it.

Agreed. It is what it is and it's been decided.

Want to obstruct that process by hiding behind a closed window? You're only opening yourself up to more intrusive measures. Don't want to answer where you're going? Whatever, don't. While you ...

The ride program has already been deemed to infringe on the Constitution, yet for some reason... they've allowed it for the purpose of security. Anytime you enter a motor vehicle, the police have significantly more rights than they would normally have and use 'safety' as the justification for this unparalleled power. I'm not a big fan either, but ...

Update!!

So I had my trial today, first time ever representing myself and I'm very proud of what I learned and how much more I understand how this whole process works.

I will start with the verdict:
Guilty

I had a notebook with questions, statements and my closing argument for 4 different scenarios, I had copies of case law and photographs for ...

The ride program has already been deemed to infringe on the Constitution, yet for some reason... they've allowed it for the purpose of security. Anytime you enter a motor vehicle, the police have significantly more rights than they would normally have and use 'safety' as the justification for this unparalleled power. I'm not a big fan either, but ...

Just to give closure; my trial date was yesterday, and after 2 adjournments, the officer never showed up for date #3 so the case was thrown. Ultimately that's the end result I was hoping for, but considering the amount of preparation I did, I wouldn't have minded battling it out to get that result.

So thanks to Sonic's advice, I had prepared and ...

If this is how you are going to tackle it then at your own risk...

I don't believe the charge can be amended once the trial starts so keep quiet about the bylaws. You allow the trial to begin (prior to start it will be amended to 72 in a 50).

York (Regional Municipality) v. Winlow, 2009 ONCA 643

Third issue: Is the practice of "amending up ...

First, what your attempting to do is way, way, way beyond any measure someone should try and go after to defend a speeding ticket. Assuming you have a valid argument, you'd need expert testimony, probably a team of lawyers, and multiple exhibits to show that the prescribed speed limit is set for no reason (disproving safety concerns, road ...

I believe, based on the information here - they're charging you solely based on speed (165 on a 100KM/HR Zone). If that's the case, it's pretty much going to be the same defence as a speeding ticket, independent recollection, test times, calibration, etc. Unfortunately, you were charged by the OPP rather a municipal police officer - the difference ...

I agree with the above, that it shouldn't affect your insurance. It wouldn't make sense for it to affect it simply because it's not something you have the right to dispute, if you're not formally charged, you can't attend a trial and plead your innocence, therefore it would be unconstitutional for it to affect your insurance in any regard.

This is ...

In this particular incident, I will refrain from making any claims. Your set fine appears to be incorrect, and I am aware that people have appealed successfully and had the ticket quashed in their respective situations, however - in reading London v. Young, what stands out to me is:

London (City) v. Young, 2008 ONCA 429
http://canlii.ca/t/1x2n3 ...

There is one avenue that most people on this forum should be taking, and I don't know why they don't... I usually study/attend criminal law trials, and the HTA is held to a significantly lower standard in terms of accountability and fundamental rights than criminal law - so I may be wrong here, I have been in regards to HTA in the past... but ...

Yeah, both of you seem to be right. The article I was looking at seemed to suggest that all cross*walks* would be included, so I got worried for a second. Thankfully, that doesn't seem to be the case.

In regards to crossovers, I thought that was always the law so it doesn't make a difference for me. I didn't know you could pass through those ...

Isn't there a police manual that says they have to estimate speed first, then measure to confirm?

The officer already confirms in his notes that he notices a vehicle traveling at a high rate of speed before using the device. There's no need for him to calculate a specific speed down to the km before using other measures, if that's what you're ...

http://www.nationalpost.com/m/wp/blog.html?b=news.nationalpost.com//news/canada/canadian-politics/1000-tickets-for-distracted-driving-500-for-biking-without-a-light-and-other-laws-to-hit-ontario-streets

Most of them I don't mind, but I find the crosswalk one ridiculous, unless I'm interpreting it wrong. You can't make a right turn until the ...

Step 1.) Request disclosure. Google it and you'll find out the process - you can fax them your request.

After that, see if you have a case, and if you don't, take a deal - they'll 'usually' offer you a deal, if you've never had a prior I'd be surprised if they don't offer you one. It's the luck of the draw really, it depends on how accepting your ...

Yeah, usually when you're caught with a detector/jammer the officers device (usually a laser device) can detect the signal is being jammed and detect that there is a laser jammer and initiate a code. I know this because I requested disclosure of the manual for my speeding trial and it said that a code will display if it detects a jammer.

Truth be ...

So we just came back and the new sitting prosecutor also said that laser devices only need to be tested either before or after. They don't need to be tested twice.

She said that R. v. Sepiashvili [2003] O.J. No. 3996 says that the Justice of Peace can be satisfied with only one test being performed.

I've read the entire decision in full, and ...

Well, there's actually case law suggesting the Court should help an unrepresented defendant understand his legal rights - but generally the main concern with fighting HTA offences are - they are usually under a JP.

That's the biggest concern, a lot of the times the JP has (in my personal experience) less knowledge of the law than you and can ...

Oh wow, my apologies here to you guys. I obviously need to spend a few more years becoming well-versed in the law regarding the HTA. It's contradicting because in criminal law, they cannot stop you without reasonable cause. When charged with an offence, you are in theory being criminally charged (as opposed to civily) - therefore the laws regarding ...

Decatur wrote:Here's the link to the decision. Read it or don't.
http://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/199 ... ii108.html
argyle and bend are correct.

Based on what? I just read it and it confirmed everything I was saying. The Supreme Court failed to give police the ability to stop any driver without cause.

To the second part, it is impossible to know if he had his license on him WITHOUT stopping him first. If they weren't legally permitted to stop him, that evidence would NOT be admissible in court, and cannot be used to prosecute him - in other words, there's absolutely no case if you can prove the stop was unlawful in the first place.

The point ...