Does "at or near" extend to the wrong municipality? The boundary between two neighbouring municipalities is named Street B. This street has a wide grassy median dividing it. I was travelling on one side of Street B when I was stopped by the police and issued a traffic ticket.
Officer Wrote the Wrong Municipality on My Ticket
The officer wrote the ticket showing at or near the municipality on the opposite side of the street. I was not in, nor had I entered the other municipality prior to or during the interaction with the officer and ticket issuance.
It's a Significant Error
That is a significant variance from a wrong street address or house number for example. Is that sufficient grounds to challenge the ticket, assuming the officer does not offer to correct the evidence as presented during their testimony?
Will the Justice Dismiss the Ticket?
If the officer does not correct the location on the ticket, is it possible to simply state that the route I travelled and where the officer pulled me over was not in the municipality shown on the ticket? I'm hoping to have the ticket dismissed so that I don't have to dispute the alleged offence.
I'm Prepared to Dispute the Charge Too
I am prepared to dispute the charge as well, but that is not as indisputable and the evidence may be challenged in cross-examination. I know you must present the entire arguments so if the first argument is not sufficient I can't add arguments after, but would rather only present sufficient evidence to dismiss the ticket.
How the Courts View "At or Near"
Given that you are driving on the boundary between two municipalities, you are definitely "at or near" either one of them. The case of R v Johnson involves an intersection that was alleged did not exist in Vancouver.
Reading this will likely give you some idea of whether your argument would succeed or not. My opinion is that it is not likely.
Share This Article
You can certainly try and request the ticket be dismissed for citing incorrect information. Whether or not the JP rules favourably on that motion is a hit-or-miss. More likely miss. What you'd basically be saying is "I was guilty at a slightly different location than noted". I'd have a Plan B.
- Log in to post comments
The fact that the violation ticket reads "at or near", I doubt that you would be succesfull in your argument, crown could easily argue that a few feet qualifies as "near". Also, if the crown wants to request an amend on the violation ticket, they must do so prior to the trial taking place. If the trial starts, they cannot amend it.
What the Justice will look at when judging on an amendement request is: Is the amendment changing the jeoperty of the defendant? If so, they may not allow it or they may allow it and offer you an adjugment so that you can prepare your "new" defence. In a case of a few feet from one city to another, the amendement request would probably be granted.
- Log in to post comments
- Log in to post comments
Defect