Kelly Culin

The Appellant, a police constable, appealed a conviction for neglect of duty after failing to process a speeding ticket he had issued.

He argued that the Hearing Officer erred in assessing credibility and that the disciplinary proceedings were an abuse of process motivated by his other employment issues.

The Ontario Civilian Police Commission dismissed the appeal, finding that the Hearing Officer's conclusions were supported by clear and convincing evidence and that the circumstances, while questionable, did not meet the high threshold required to stay the proceedings for abuse of process.

The appellant sought leave to appeal the penalties imposed on a police officer for discreditable conduct, as well as the withdrawal of other disciplinary charges.

The Commission held a preliminary hearing to determine the appellant's standing as a public complainant and its jurisdiction over withdrawn charges.

The Commission found that the appellant's statement to the OPP during a criminal investigation did not constitute a public complaint under Part V of the Police Services Act.

The appellant only had standing to appeal the penalty for one count arising from a later written complaint.

Furthermore, the Commission ruled it had no statutory authority to hear appeals regarding disciplinary charges that were withdrawn by the prosecutor, as no decision had been rendered on those charges.

The appellant brought an application under section 70(4) of the Police Services Act seeking leave to appeal decisions arising from disciplinary proceedings against a police constable.

The parties agreed that two preliminary matters needed to be determined before the leave to appeal application could proceed.