Traffic ticket convictions are difficult to dispute. They involve a complex process of filing documentation, ordering transcripts, and then serving the right offices. Finally, you must prepare a written argument and make an argument in court in front of a judge. This blog post will explain the steps to help you successfully appeal a traffic ticket conviction.
In order to successfully appeal a conviction in court, you must first file a Notice of Appeal. This involves preparing the correct form, filing it in the correct place and ensuring it is served on the Attorney General of British Columbia’s office for criminal or summary conviction appeals. The Notice of Appeal must be filed within thirty days of the date you received the conviction and were sentenced.
There are also steps that have to be taken after you file the Notice of Appeal, including ordering a copy of the transcripts. These transcripts then must be filed in the registry, and then again served to the Crown. Typically the transcript company or Registry will take care of filing the transcripts and serving the Crown, but this is not always the case.
Once you have these transcripts, you must then prepare a Statement of Argument. This is a written argument, not to exceed 20 pages in length, setting out the legal errors you are alleging the judge or judicial justice made.
A problem arises during the appeal process for many people because they usually confuse an appeal as a new trial when they are not at all the same thing. An appeal is a determination of whether there were any errors that led to a conviction that should not have been imposed.
This is where having a lawyer to help you with your traffic ticket appeal can be incredibly important. Because traffic ticket appeals are very technical, having a lawyer can help you understand the significance of the issues that arise in a trial.
For example, if you are self-represented in your trial, certain information must be conveyed to you in order for you to understand how to represent yourself. If the information is not sufficiently conveyed to you, or it becomes clear you do not understand, there is some obligation on judges to intervene and provide assistance when you are self-represented.
The failure to do so may constitute an error that led to an unfair trial. However, the assistance that can be provided has significant limits as well.
When you are arguing an appeal, you will have to identify what errors were made. Identifying the error also requires you to identify something known as the standard of review. This a really fancy way of saying the amount of scrutiny an appeal court judge will give to the reasons in the original trial. There are different standards of review for different types of errors.
For example, if there was an error made that had to do with the facts of the case, the standard of review is one of the palpable and overriding errors. This means the error has to be central to the decision and manifestly has affected the conclusion before the appellate court can intervene.
Legal errors are errors that arise from an incorrect application of the law. These errors are subject to a different standard of review. Still yet, errors related to the fairness of the trial have yet another standard that has to be considered by the appeal court.
Because there are many different standards of review that an appeal could fall under, it is generally not advisable to represent yourself in an appeal. Without years of legal training, it can be difficult to identify what is the appropriate standard of review and articulate how that applies to any errors you are alleging were made by the judicial justice or judge in your trial.
As stated above, an appeal is not a new trial. Therefore, an appeal is not simply a matter of going in and telling another judge your story. An argument on appeal has to be grounded in something that went wrong in your first trial that could have led to a different outcome.
Even though a trial may be flawed, you also have to prove that the error could have reasonably affected the outcome. Some errors are inconsequential and do not strike at the heart of the essential elements of the offence or whether the trial itself was fair. If a judicial justice or judge determining a traffic ticket makes an error that would not have had any bearing on the ultimate decision reached, then that error is not likely to be sufficient to lead to a new trial.
This is because the Criminal Code, which governs appeals, contains a section known as the “curative proviso.” This is a silly way of saying that if an error does not matter to the outcome or the fairness of the trial, it is not really an error.
Finally, the remedy you get if your trial is unfair or flawed in some way is also an open question. In some circumstances, it may be considered appropriate for an appellate court to order a new trial. In other circumstances, the matter goes back for a rehearing on sentencing and yet still in some limited circumstances, the conviction can be squashed and an acquittal can be entered.
Determining what remedies should flow from what error, is a very difficult legal task.
A lawyer knows the difficult steps that must be undertaken in an appeal, the manner in which arguments must be prepared and filed, the nuances of the standard of review, the appropriate remedy, and articulating the way in which errors affected the outcome of a trial.
For this reason, it is always advisable to contact a lawyer before filing for an appeal. But do not forget, you have only 30 days from the date you were convicted and sentenced to file your appeal.
Our office handles numerous traffic ticket appeals and we would be happy to assist you going forward if you are considering appealing your traffic ticket conviction.
