Ontario Court of Justice

Date: October 2, 2015 Court File No.: Toronto

Between:

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Respondent)

— AND —

IVAN GOCHKO (Appellant)

Before: Justice Nakatsuru

Heard on: October 1, 2015

Reasons for Judgment released on: October 2, 2015

Counsel

J. Hurst — counsel for the Respondent

I. Gochko — the Appellant in person

NAKATSURU J.:

ENDORSEMENT

[1] The appellant appeals the convictions made on May 11, 2015, by Justice of the Peace R. Wong of drive under suspension and drive with a licence issued in another jurisdiction while under suspension in Ontario. The appellant plead not guilty and represented himself at his trial.

[2] The appellant argued first of all that somehow the originating process was incorrect or that there was no power to amend the tickets he had initially received from the police officer. The law that he made brief reference to have little application in this case. Those cases refer to Part I tickets. In this case, although the police officer originally laid such tickets, (which the officer admitted included the wrong charge), a Part III information was sworn and the appellant was summoned to his trial. The appellant appeared and attorned to the jurisdiction. He set a date for his trial. At his trial, he was arraigned on two counts of the information correctly and without objection. When this issue arose at his trial, the Justice of the Peace made careful inquiries that the appellant was properly prepared to meet the charges he was arraigned on. The appellant stated he was. I see no merit to the argument and would dismiss this ground of appeal argued by the appellant.

[3] Secondly, the appellant argued in essence that the verdict was unreasonable and that he should have been acquitted by the Justice of the Peace. The appellant had been previously convicted of an impaired driving offence and fined $1,000. He failed to pay this fine. As a result his licence was suspended. The appellant argued that he had tried to pay the fine after returning to the jurisdiction but had been told by a counter clerk of the Ministry of Transportation when he inquired that there was no fine and his licence was okay.

[4] The Justice of the Peace rejected this defence, concluded that the appellant was properly served with the notice of suspension, had failed to advise the Ministry of the changes in his address as required, and had not acted diligently when he was provided information that the system had not indicated that there was a fine outstanding. Further, he rejected any claim by the appellant that he was misled by an officially induced error given the status of the official who provided him this information.

[5] In my opinion, the Justice of the Peace was entitled to come to these conclusions based upon the evidence. The verdicts were reasonable.

[6] From my careful review of the transcript, the Justice of the Peace was most fair and provided considerable assistance to the appellant. There was nothing wrong or unfair in the trial that he had. I have done this review given the appellant was not represented by counsel or an agent on this appeal in order to ensure that he had received a fair trial on these charges.

[7] As a result, the appeal is dismissed.

Released: October 2, 2015

Signed: "Justice S. Nakatsuru"