Ontariohighwaytrafficact.com

Need some advice on reaching a plea deal with the prosecutor and how to go about talking to the crown. I'm not here to be lectured ect. I'm aware I made a mistake, and need advice on fixing it. So kindly keep comments about my impulsive decision to yourself.

Backstory:

I'm 19 with a g2 license. Was going home late at night and decided to go down a road that I knew was smooth with zero traffic so I could do a little pull. The road has a fairly steep hill so it was not hard to pick up speed over a short distance and have 5 seconds of fun. Long story short I approach the bottom of the hill, I see headlights on the shoulder on the opposite side of the road. Cherries on, cop pulls me over.

Officer asks if I knew how fast I was going. I said that I knew I was going fast, but did not look down to see how fast I was going. 117km/hr in a 40 zone.

7 day suspension, 7 day impound, Stunt Driving ticket, and speeding ticket for 77km/hr over the limit

Spoke to the officer and explained my financial situation (single mom, student, not working) and took responsibility for my mistake. Officer told me "I'd live". After speaking to my mother, he became remorseful so I assume he didn't believe what I had to say at first. Officer advised me while driving me home to request full disclosure and look over his notes for any mistakes, as well as telling me some officers don't show up for court at least 4 times. Odd?

So my question is, what plea deal (if any) do you presume I'll be offered, how do I go about asking for a plea deal, how do I go about speaking to the crown/what advantage does speaking to the crown give me, and should I request an early resolution? I will also be representing myself as I can't afford to pay for paralegal/lawyer.

Side note: No prior speeding offenses, 1 offense for Disobey Lane Light.

I doubt you will be offered any plea deal. I certainly know my Crowns wouldn't have and the chances of him not turning up are almost nil. An officer might miss a simple ticket and will get spanked for it but not for a ticket like this.

77 over on a highway would be taken as very serious but 77 over on a road that warrants a 40 km/her limit is not going to go away easily.

You will need to get a dismissal or acquittal to be able to drive again for a long time either through suspension or eye-bleeding insurance rates so I would be finding a professional to assist. Someone will be along shortly to comment on the best way to select someone.

argyll wrote:

I doubt you will be offered any plea deal. I certainly know my Crowns wouldn't have and the chances of him not turning up are almost nil. An officer might miss a simple ticket and will get spanked for it but not for a ticket like this.

77 over on a highway would be taken as very serious but 77 over on a road that warrants a 40 km/her limit is not going to go away easily.

You will need to get a dismissal or acquittal to be able to drive again for a long time either through suspension or eye-bleeding insurance rates so I would be finding a professional to assist. Someone will be along shortly to comment on the best way to select someone.

I'm not planning on driving for at least 5 years, and I'm aware that upon conviction I will get a minimum 30 day suspension as I am a G2 driver with an offense that carries a penalty of 6 points. I know the ticket is not going away easily. I'm not looking for the best way to select someone to represent me. I need to know how to speak to the crown and answers to my other questions. Maybe some tips from anyone who has gone through the process?

Just make an appointment to go see the prosecutor and throw yourself on the sword...Both stunting and speeding are laid, so they have one to deal away, they are expecting to hear from you or an agent...If the prosecutor offers, I would reccomend taking the speeding charge, it shouldn't hurt as much when it comes to insurance...it is sure to sting though...Given your current situation, you can ask for an extended amount of time to pay.

I would suggest this;

Don't do anything at all - yet.

Appear on the first appearance date and request disclosure - agree to return on whatever date they request if it's an agreeable date to you.

Now that you have the officer's notes - go through them very carefully - looking for errors - you may want to post the notes here redacting personal stuff.

The fact he suggested this leads me to believe the disclosure may not have the make of the measuring device - test times - perhaps he isn't currently certified - assuming this is radar or laser and not pacing.

One step at a time - don't be in hurry with this - it's far too important.

screeech wrote:

I would reccomend taking the speeding charge, it shouldn't hurt as much when it comes to insurance...

It still falls into the serious bracket. Surcharge would be the the same for any offense in the bracket (100% surcharge pretty much guaranteed).

Prosecutors do not have to offer you any kind of plea deal, although sometimes they do. If you are nice and ask if they will give you some kind of deal then maybe, but no guarantees. All you can do is ask nicely!

Is it a SUMMONS for both tickets or is one/both a NOTICE OF OFFENCE?

It would have to be a summons for both... There is no way they would proceed to trial on both charges, the prosecutor will offer you a deal if you are willing to plead guilty to one...

jsherk wrote:

Prosecutors do not have to offer you any kind of plea deal, although sometimes they do. If you are nice and ask if they will give you some kind of deal then maybe, but no guarantees. All you can do is ask nicely!

Is it a SUMMONS for both tickets or is one/both a NOTICE OF OFFENCE?

It's a summons for both.

karra wrote:

I would suggest this;

Don't do anything at all - yet.

Appear on the first appearance date and request disclosure - agree to return on whatever date they request if it's an agreeable date to you.

Now that you have the officer's notes - go through them very carefully - looking for errors - you may want to post the notes here redacting personal stuff.

The fact he suggested this leads me to believe the disclosure may not have the make of the measuring device - test times - perhaps he isn't currently certified - assuming this is radar or laser and not pacing.

One step at a time - don't be in hurry with this - it's far too important.

It wouldn't make sense for the officer not to be certified considering he was the Supervisor of the traffic division r.i.p. to me lol

screeech wrote:

It would have to be a summons for both... There is no way they would proceed to trial on both charges, the prosecutor will offer you a deal if you are willing to plead guilty to one...

I don't know if they'll give me the option of pleading guilty to one and dropping the other considering I was going 77km/hr over the speed limit in a 40km/hr zone. They might try me for both.

I totally disagree...That is why they lay both charges, stunt and speeding...so they have wiggle room to make a deal...I would be more than shocked if they didn't...please let us know how it goes...

Remember that the summons date is NOT your trial date.

At the summons date you can:

- Just plead guilty (not adviseable).

- Ask for disclosure and plead not guilty and ask for a trial date.

- Ask for a deal and then request disclosure before you decide how to plead (they will set another summons date for you which is not the trial date either).

The prosecutor will probably meet with you before the court starts. So at first, just ask if there is any kind of deal they might be willing to offer you, then after they offer you a deal, then you can ask if you can review disclosure before you decide whether to take the deal or or not, and usually they will say yes and set another summons date for you.

Yes, it will be one or the other.

jsherk is right, they do not "have to" offer you any kind of deal, but they always do, the reason is, they do not want to deal with the possibility of you getting off on a technicality and they prefer a guaranteed win over a "most likely" win scenario.

Once you go to court, anything can happen, even best officer testimonies at times are brought into question, especially when the defendant is not rattled and he/she does not self incriminate.

Not to mention, going through the entire process of swearing in the officer and the rest of the process/procedure is time consuming and it slows down the courts, this puts a larger load on them, which it enable more people down the road to file for 11b motions.

Combination of all these factors is what makes them offer you deals, now, depending on the prosecutor and the charge, he/she might want to drop one for the other or offer reduced charge on both. Given your situation one is dependent on the other, most likely he/she will drop one for the other.

Just an FYI, the fact that you won't be driving for next few years will not help your insurance, because once there is laps in your coverage, your rate will go up to a novice driver rate and all your driving experience is out the window.

For charges like this, the crown will not offer a plea-deal with the OP; they will proceed straight to trial and request for maximum fines, suspension and sentences. Crown will make an example out of you; OP needs some form of representation to avoid a trial or minimize the damage at sentencing.

+77kph under S172 Stunt Driving

$2,000 to $10,000 fine

6 months incarceration

1st conviction: up to 2 years DL suspension

+77kph under S128 Speeding

Conviction Fine: $9.75/kph = $750.75

Victim Surcharge = $125

Court Fee = $5

Total Fine: $880.75

1st conviction: up to 30 day DL suspension

Also just because OP was charged with S128 & S172, does not mean that after the trial... OP will be found guilty of S128. The crown has evidence for a S172 conviction, and will get it. We have several decisions where this has been upheld.

Does stunt driving require the same proof as speeding? Meaning does crown have to prove the speed using say radar or pacing? Or is it more based on the opinion testimony of officer that they were just driving way faster than everybody else?

jsherk wrote:

Does stunt driving require the same proof as speeding? Meaning does crown have to prove the speed using say radar or pacing? Or is it more based on the opinion testimony of officer that they were just driving way faster than everybody else?

Good question, I love to hear how the officers on this forum will answer this...

For charges like this, the crown will not offer a plea-deal with the OP; they will proceed straight to trial and request for maximum fines, suspension and sentences. Crown will make an example out of you; OP needs some form of representation to avoid a trial or minimize the damage at sentencing.

+77kph under S172 Stunt Driving

$2,000 to $10,000 fine

6 months incarceration

1st conviction: up to 2 years DL suspension

+77kph under S128 Speeding

Conviction Fine: $9.75/kph = $750.75

Victim Surcharge = $125

Court Fee = $5

Total Fine: $880.75

1st conviction: up to 30 day DL suspension

Yikes, talk about a HUGE mistake, sounds like this kind of bad judgement is not something you can simply say "I'm sorry, it was a momentary lapse of judgement"

First of all: what does OP stand for, exactly...I am aware of who the OP is in this matter, just not sure what that actually stands for...

Yes, the crown must prove the speeding over by 50Km/H or more, this is done with a speed measuring device being radar or laser, I reccon on a good day it could be done by a pace too...the other form of stunting is by the officers observations: doing burnouts, driving with people in the trunk, weaving in and out of traffic at a rate of speed higher than...

There is no way this person will be convicted on both...There is no way this person is going to jail for 6 months, not even a day...a hefty fine for sure along with a suspension, that's it...Unless this young person as a very horrible record...

You can't be convicted of both. It's the same when an impaired and a charge of over 80 are laid. If the Crown gets a conviction on one of them, they will withdraw the other. Which one they get a conviction on depends on the evidence. They may even have evidence for both.

Also keep in mind that the offence of speeding is an absolute liability offence while any of the stunt offences (including speeding 50 km/h or more) are strict liability.

R. v Raham

https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onca/doc/2 ... pletePos=2

I would strongly recommend that the OP (original poster) get legal council.

And I disagree with screeech. Jail time is a possibility with a speed like that. Depending on the circumstances and evidence. Regardless of your driving record.

With no real aggravating factors, other than the speed, with a clean record, and on a guilty plea, there is an extremely low chance of any jail time...I really hope the OP keeps us informed on this...

so really, if "everyone" who had a ticket , challenged it, the system would fall flat on its face

Observer135 wrote:

jsherk is right, they do not "have to" offer you any kind of deal, but they always do, the reason is, they do not want to deal with the possibility of you getting off on a technicality and they prefer a guaranteed win over a "most likely" win scenario.

Once you go to court, anything can happen, even best officer testimonies at times are brought into question, especially when the defendant is not rattled and he/she does not self incriminate.

Not to mention, going through the entire process of swearing in the officer and the rest of the process/procedure is time consuming and it slows down the courts, this puts a larger load on them, which it enable more people down the road to file for 11b motions.

Combination of all these factors is what makes them offer you deals, now, depending on the prosecutor and the charge, he/she might want to drop one for the other or offer reduced charge on both. Given your situation one is dependent on the other, most likely he/she will drop one for the other.

Just an FYI, the fact that you won't be driving for next few years will not help your insurance, because once there is laps in your coverage, your rate will go up to a novice driver rate and all your driving experience is out the window.

Not only the "system". Quite a few ther things as well. Most employers won't pay you while you're at court fighting a ticket.

OP = original post or poster

Yes, OP will only be convicted of one charge; crown will be seeking a guilty conviction on S172 and not S128.

jsherk wrote:

Does stunt driving require the same proof as speeding? Meaning does crown have to prove the speed using say radar or pacing? Or is it more based on the opinion testimony of officer that they were just driving way faster than everybody else?

The essential elements to get a conviction for speeding under S128 & S172 are the same. The only difference is that under S172, the defence is afforded a "due diligence" defence; speeding under S172 is "strict liability" because incarceration is possible.

This is 164 in a 80 zone, defendant was found not-guilty using a "necessity" defence: Ontario v. Kallish [2011] O.J. No. 707

From what the OP described, she was going for a joyride? rather than life was in danger.

bobajob wrote:

so really, if "everyone" who had a ticket , challenged it, the system would fall flat on its face

Observer135 wrote:

jsherk is right, they do not "have to" offer you any kind of deal, but they always do, the reason is, they do not want to deal with the possibility of you getting off on a technicality and they prefer a guaranteed win over a "most likely" win scenario.

Once you go to court, anything can happen, even best officer testimonies at times are brought into question, especially when the defendant is not rattled and he/she does not self incriminate.

Not to mention, going through the entire process of swearing in the officer and the rest of the process/procedure is time consuming and it slows down the courts, this puts a larger load on them, which it enable more people down the road to file for 11b motions.

Combination of all these factors is what makes them offer you deals, now, depending on the prosecutor and the charge, he/she might want to drop one for the other or offer reduced charge on both. Given your situation one is dependent on the other, most likely he/she will drop one for the other.

Just an FYI, the fact that you won't be driving for next few years will not help your insurance, because once there is laps in your coverage, your rate will go up to a novice driver rate and all your driving experience is out the window.

You are correct. The system that is designed to ensure people follow the rules of the road as determined by our elected representatives, that help ensure that if you are hit by a driver that they will have insurance, that drivers don't speed or run red lights or anything else deemed to be unacceptable by our elected government. Yes I do think there are some really stupid chicken-*EDIT* tickets given out by police officers but without traffic enforcement (and the court system to back it up) our roads would be death traps. When a 'normal' person gets a ticket it is a real bummer but remember that we also get some really dangerous people off the roads through simple traffic enforcement.