Ted Allen Supervising Prosecutor Region of York September 2014.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
JUSTICES OF THE PEACE TRAINING PROGRAMME Section 49 ROAD TRAFFIC ACT STEPHEN WILSON MAGISTRATENORTHAM 19 TH June 2009.
Advertisements

Administration of the Judicial Environment Prepared and Presented By Gladstone K. Hlalakuhle.
Bylaw Development Using Your Powers Wisely Presented by: Ministry of Municipal Affairs Advisory Services.
The Quality of Care Information Protection Act, 2004 (QCIPA): An Overview Note: This overview is presented for the convenience of reference only. Nothing.
Prosecuting Stalking Fiona Gray Trial Advocate Office of the
+ Courtroom Participants. + 2 Fundamental Principles An accused person is innocent until proven guilty. Guilt must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
HB1695 and HB1540 Legislative Update 2010 The Missouri Bar Solo and Small Firm Conference Jason Lamb Office of Prosecution Services.
DUE PROCESS DEVELOPMENTS IN TERMINATION AND GRIEVANCES.
Juvenile Justice system
“Student Due Process” School Administrators of South Dakota April 7, 2015.
BREAKOUT SESSION 1 Parking 1. Discussion Topics 1. Parking violations – 1993 revision of parking infractions to admin. offenses 2. Vehicle Code section.
Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act Final Rule Joseph Baressi June 3, 2009.
Character and credit Miiko Kumar 9 February 2015.
Exceptions to the hearsay rule – how to enter evidence without the witness Catherine Glaister, Crown Counsel, MAG, MOL – LSB Nicholas Adamson, Crown Counsel,
Hearsay Rule Lecture 6, 2014.
Minimum Wages Act History of Minimum Wages ILO Convention no26 in1928 Recommended Machinery for Fixation of minimum wages The Standing Labour Committee.
1 Compliance and Response Branch Transportation of Dangerous Goods Michel K. Vitou Chief, Enforcement Chef, Application de la Loi General Policy Advisory.
Legal status of CMS circulars Paul Midlane. Confused? Performance based incentives for managed healthcare is not permitted CMS indaba cancelled Supporting.
Court Files Evidence Required Ontario Building Officials Association Prepared by Ted Allen Supervising Prosecutor Region of York October 2013.
Bye Brown v. Bi-Lo Presented by Harold J. Willson, Jr. (864)
1 Employment Equity Amendment Bill, 2012 PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON LABOUR 12 March 2013.
Ontario Building Officials Association Electronic Notes Prepared by Ted Allen Supervising Prosecutor Region of York October 2014.
Trial Procedures Law 120 MHS Mr. Binet.
SOUTHEAST ASIA REGIONAL CONFERENCE ON ACCESS TO JUSTICE 13 – 14 August 2015 WITNESS PROTECTION IN BRUNEI DARUSSALAM Zuraidah Sidek Criminal Justice Division.
EDAD 520 Legal and Ethical Foundations of Educational Leadership.
Summary Judgment and Summary Adjudication LA 310.
1 A decade of revisions at UNCITRAL Special Course 6 – James Castello Lecture 3 Arbitration Academy PA R I S SUMMER COURSES
Minimum Wages Act 1948.
Statements and Confessions
SCHOOL LAW Keeping US Out of Court. Ind. Code § : Indiana Code - Section : Grounds for suspension or expulsion (a) The following.
THE CRIMINAL COURT SYSTEM The Participants. BURDEN OF PROOF  2 Fundamental Principles: Accused is innocent until proven guilty. Guilt must be proved.
Role of Federal Labour Program Inspectors Union of Taxation employees November 6, 2015 Marc Béland PSAC Regional Health and Safety Representative National.
TRIAL PROCEDURE Dr. KAROLINA KREMENS, LL.M. (Ottawa) International Criminal Procedure.
INVESTIGATION KAROLINA KREMENS, LL.M. (Ottawa), Ph.D. International Criminal Procedure.
IMMIGRATION AMENDMENT BILL 2006 Presentation to Select Committee on Social Services (National Council of Provinces) 27 February 2007 Caring, compassionate.
Revision and Supersession DLA/AA and PIP. The statutory structure – DLA/AA Where a decision made under s.8 SSA 1998 awarding benefit, the recipient is.
Sharing Information (FERPA) FY07 REMS Initial Grantee Meeting December 5, 2007, San Diego, CA U.S. Department of Education, Office of Safe and Drug-Free.
Change Orders, Extras and Claims Presented by Geoffrey Cantello, City of Ottawa.
Tax Court of Canada THIRD PARTY INFORMATION IN MAKING ASSESSMENT INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF TAX JUDGES Lucerne, Switzerland September 4, 2015 The Hon.
BY Suhail Anjum Siddiqui,Advocate B.com.(Hons)LL.B(Hons.) MBA.
1 TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF SAFETY 1. 2 COMMERCIAL DRIVERS LICENSE HOLDERS 2.
1 Diocesan Canonical Changes Duncan A. Bayne Vice-chancellor Diocese of Olympia Title IV.
BILL 68 UPDATE Kim Allen, P.Eng. – CEO/Registrar.
1.  Minimum of 3 and maximum of 5 members including the president. 2.
ARBITRATION ACT. Challenge of arbitrator The appointment of an arbitrator may be challenged on the issues of – (i) impartiality, – (ii) independence,
(Private) Auto Subrogation in Canada. Private Auto Insurance Provinces: – Alberta, Ontario, P.E.I., New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Newfoundland Territories.
Cje Karolina Kremens, LL.M., Ph.D. Wojciech Jasiński, Ph.D. Department of Criminal Procedure Faculty of Law, Administration and Economics University of.
Sophie Honohan Barrister-at-Law, Accredited Mediator 21 st April, 2016 Health Identifiers Act Conference.
WELCOME TO EVIDENCE 2016 Miiko Kumar. What is evidence law about? Where is evidence law from? Where is evidence law now? What are the aims of the laws.
BRIEFING TO THE SELECT COMMITTEE ON SECURITY AND JUSTICE: MUNICIPAL LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS (7 June 2017)
Role of the Ministry of Labour Inspectors
Dr Adam McBeth Victorian Bar (Foley’s List)
“A-B-C’s” of what you need to know for your mock trials!
Wyoming Statutes §§ through
Courtroom Participants
An Overview of PSE Labour Relations after Bill 7
The Participants.
WARD 5 ETOBICOKE- LAKESHORE TOWN HALL MEETING
The Criminal Justice Process
SSA Adverse Decisions and Administrative Finality
Essential Commodities Act, 1955 R/W, special provisions Act, 1981
If the statement is false explain why it is false
Facts which need not be proved by evidence
Function of the International Court of Justice (ICJ):
Trial before court of session
What is OAL? The Office of Administrative Law (OAL) ensures that agency regulations are clear, necessary, legally valid, and available to the public. OAL.
Comments on the National Environmental Management: Integrated Coastal Management Amendment Bill Adv Gary Birch 23 July 2013.
Position of the Board of Appeal in the legal protection system for Community plant variety rights Gert Würtenberger.
Wyoming Administrative Procedure Act
Stakeholders sensitization PRESENTED BY ANTHONY GACHAI PTA
Presentation transcript:

Ted Allen Supervising Prosecutor Region of York September 2014

 On July 1, 2014, the new s of the POA came into effect Certified evidence Application  48.1 (1) This section applies to a hearing, including a hearing in the absence of a defendant under section 54, where, 48.1 (1)  (a) the proceeding for the offence was commenced by certificate under Part I or II; and  (b) the offence is specified by the regulations. 2009, c. 33, Sched. 4, s. 1 (40). Admissibility of certified evidence  (2) The following are admissible in evidence as proof of the facts certified in it, in the absence of evidence to the contrary: (2)  1. A certified statement in a certificate of offence.  2. A certified statement in a certificate of parking infraction.  3. Other types of certified evidence specified by the regulations. 2009, c. 33, Sched. 4, s. 1 (40).

Other provisions on admissibility (3) For greater certainty, subsection (2) does not affect or interfere with the operation of a provision of this Act or any other Act that permits or specifies that a document or type of document be admitted into evidence as proof of the facts certified in it. 2009, c. 33, Schedule 4, s. 1 (40). (3) Onus (4) For greater certainty, this section does not remove the onus on the prosecution to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. 2009, c. 33, Schedule 4, s. 1 (40). (4)

No oral evidence (5) A provincial offences officer who provides certified evidence referred to in subsection (2) in respect of a proceeding shall not be required to attend to give evidence at trial, except as provided under subsection 49 (4). 2009, c. 33, Schedule. 4, s. 1 (40). (5) Regulations (6) The Lieutenant Governor in Council may make regulations, (6) (a) specifying offences for the purposes of clause (1) (b); (b) respecting other types of certified evidence for the purposes of paragraph 3 of subsection (2); (c) respecting restrictions or conditions on the admissibility of evidence under subsection (2). 2009, c. 33, Schedule. 4, s. 1 (40). See: 2009, c. 33, Schedule. 4, ss. 1 (40), 5 (4).

The statutory provision + the regulation – O. Reg. 132/14. Only available in Part I and Part II proceedings. Must be a prescribed offence in the regulation or a prescribed type of evidence in order to be used/relied upon + The defendant must not have been given the option of requesting that the officer attend at the trial (the new forms must have been used including the new notice of trial).

Offences are prescribed in regulation (O. Reg. 132/14) In the absence of evidence to the contrary, the following is admissible as proof of facts certified in it: 1. A certified statement in a certificate of offence 2. A certified statement in a certificate of parking infraction 3. Other types of certified evidence specified by the regulations Section does not remove the onus on the prosecution to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt.

Does not interfere or change the admissibility of certified evidence in other statutes. The authority in offence-creating enactments for such evidence remains unchanged. For example, certified statements under the H.T.A. (RLC charges, Ministry records), B.C.A., Municipal Act (licensing status) Creates regulation making authority for the regulation to specify offences, create types of certificate evidence and to impose restrictions or conditions on admissibility. A provincial offences officer who provides certified evidence referred to in subsection (2) in respect of a proceeding shall not be required to attend to give evidence at trial, except as provided under subsection 49 (4).

New Regulation 132/14 came into effect July 1, 2014 Specified offences 1. (1)1. (1) Every offence for which there is a set fine, other than an offence referred to in subsection (2), is specified for the purposes of clause 48.1 (1) (b) of the Act. (2)(2) The following offences for which there is a set fine are not specified for the purposes of clause 48.1 (1) (b) of the Act: 1. Every offence under a provision of an Act, regulation or municipal by-law that, on the offence date indicated in the offence notice, is set out in the Table to Ontario Regulation 339/94 (Demerit Point System) made under the Highway Traffic Act. 2. An offence under section 128 of the Highway Traffic Act.

Other types of certified evidence 2.2. The following types of certified evidence are specified for the purposes of paragraph 3 of subsection 48.1 (2) of the Act: 1. A certified copy of a photograph taken by a provincial offences officer. 2. In respect of a document, a certified statement by a provincial offences officer that he or she served the document on the person charged, with the date and method of service indicated. 3. A certified statement by a provincial offences officer respecting the configuration, weight, dimensions or other characteristics of a vehicle inspected by the provincial offences officer.

The Regulation sets forth the detail and is a critical component. Excluded are any offences for which demerit points are applied upon conviction and speeding (section 128 H.T.A.). Otherwise certified statements may be relied upon and the issuing officer not called upon to testify at trial. As with red light camera charges, the certified statement is the certificate of offence – there is no other certified statement.

There are also three categories of certificate evidence 1. Photographs – may be certified by the provincial offences officer who took the photographs 2. Service – may be certified where not otherwise provided for 3. Weight and other details regarding commercial motor vehicles may be certified

New s. 49(3) and (4) of the POA in force July 1, 2014 Adjournment (3)(3) Despite subsection (1) and subject to subsection (4), if the trial is being held in respect of a proceeding commenced under Part I or II, the court shall not adjourn the trial for the purpose of having the provincial offences officer who completed the certificate of offence or the certificate of parking infraction, as the case may be, attend to give evidence unless the court is satisfied that the interests of justice require it. 2009, c. 33, Schedule 4, s. 1 (41).

Adjournment where certified evidence (4)(4) If certified evidence referred to in subsection 48.1(2) is being admitted as evidence in a trial referred to in subsection (1), the court shall not adjourn the trial for the purpose of having any of the following persons attend to give evidence unless the court is satisfied that the oral evidence of the person is necessary in order to ensure a fair trial: 1. The provincial offences officer who completed the certificate of offence or the certificate of parking infraction, as the case may be. 2. Any provincial offences officer who provided certified evidence in respect of the proceeding. 2009, c. 33, Schedule 4, s. 1 (41). See: 2009, c. 33, Schedule 4, ss. 1 (41), 5 (4).

The decision to use section 48.1 rests solely with the prosecutor. It is anticipated that in the case of parking infractions, prosecutors would rely almost exclusively on section 48.1 and officers would no longer testify at trials. With regard to Part I matters, for offences not excluded by the regulation, prosecutors will decide both by category or specific offence as well as on a case-by-case basis whether to rely on section 48.1.

As a result, inspector/enforcement notification of trials will continue. It will be up to the prosecutor to decide whether the prosecutor requires the inspector to attend at the trial and to notify the inspector/enforcement agency if the inspector is not required. Even though it is a prosecution decision, it is important that discussions occur locally with regard to anticipated reliance on section For example, for Part II matters, the decision may be to rely upon section 48.1 in all cases and officers are not notified.

 You need to review the short form wording to determine whether it captures the essential elements of the offence. If it does, you can rely on the Certified Statement.  If it does not, you will need to call the officer. (For example careless driving was insufficient to prove the facts for that offence – R. v. McPherson, 2012 ONCJ 807 (Ont. C.J.))  Review short form wordings for municipal charges to see if new set fine orders are needed.

 Statute passed July 1, 2014  The defendant must not have been given the option of requesting that the officer attend at the trial (the new forms must be used including the new notice of trial).  Used for part one and part two of the Provincial Offences Act (not part three)  It is the ticket (certificate of offence) that will be used as evidence

 The ticket is the certified statement  A provincial offences officer (building inspector) who provides certified evidence shall not be required to attend to give evidence at trial  Every offence under the HTA Demerit Point System, and any speeding offence is not eligible

 Part one Building code offences are eligible  Review short form wordings for municipal charges to see if new set fine orders are required

 With thanks to Hans Saamen, Senior Counsel Prosecutions for his assistance with this presentation