Chester's Case — Driving Offences — Dismissed

Background
Chester was driving with no insurance on his truck. He smashed into the car in front of him. Then he panicked. He backed up and hit a second car. As he sped off, he hit a third car. Another witness noted Chester's plate number. The police left a calling card at Chester's house. Chester called me right away. Although the Highway Traffic Act required Chester to make an accident report, he did not have to provide any other statement or evidence. I provided Chester with a written statement to give the police. This statement assisted Chester in preventing the police from collecting evidence that could later be used against him. After Chester made his accident report, the police charged him with five offences. If convicted, Chester would have faced a lengthy licence suspension and could possibly have gone to jail. We prepared for battle. At trial, one of the witnesses swore that she could identify Chester as the driver of the truck. I argued that the witness's identification of Chester was too weak to support a conviction. The Judge disagreed. He convicted on 3 of the 5 charges, suspended Chester's licence, and imposed a huge fine. I filed an appeal. In my written submissions, I argued that the convictions were unreasonable — the identification evidence was just too weak. After reading my submissions, the Crown asked the Judge to dismiss all charges.

Chester's Case
POLICE REPORT

ARREST STATEMENT

TESTIMONIAL

Between
Her Majesty the Queen, and Chester C.

Ontario Court of Justice
Toronto, Ontario
Reinhardt J.

Oral Judgement: 10 December 2002
(11 paras.)

Charges:	Fail to Remain, Fail to Report Accident, and Careless Driving, contrary to the Highway Traffic Act; and Operate Motor Vehicle without Insurance, and Make False Insurance Statement, contrary to the Compulsory Automobile Insurance Act
Counsel:	N. Trbojevic, Assistant Crown Attorney, Toronto Craig Penney, Criminal Defence Lawyer, Toronto

REINHARDT J.: —

¶ 1 MR. TRBOJEVIC: Good afternoon, Your Honour. For the record, Trbojevic. That's T-R-B-O-J-E-V-I-C, first initial "N," on behalf of the province speaking to items one through five on your appeals list for Chester C. He's represented by counsel.

¶ 2 MR. PENNEY: Good afternoon, Your Honour. Penney, initial "C."

¶ 3 MR. TRBOJEVIC: I should just indicate at the beginning here that, technically speaking, only items one through three are properly before you. Items four and five were never convicted to begin with at trial. They were dismissed at trial so obviously defence wouldn't be appealing those two items.

¶ 4 THE COURT: Right. I read the transcript. You are right, in fact.

¶ 5 MR. TRBOJEVIC: In any event, on the appeals of the three convictions that are before you, I've read the materials. I think you may see a copy of a letter I forwarded to counsel.

¶ 6 THE COURT: I do. I have read it.

¶ 7 MR. TRBOJEVIC: I'm asking the Court at this time to allow the appeals and enter acquittal on those three convictions.

¶ 8 THE COURT: Great. I think it is appropriate.

¶ 9 CLERK OF THE COURT: So - and the other two?

¶ 10 MR. TRBOJEVIC: They were actually acquitted to begin with. They are not really before us so they should be already entered as acquittals.

¶ 11 MR. PENNEY: Thank you, Your Honour, and I thank my friend for calling it.