SENTENCE - ACCUSED HAS TO UNDERSTAND ALL POTENTIAL LICENCE SUSPENSIONS

The incident giving rise to the dangerous driving charge against Mr. Quick occurred in December 2009. He pleaded guilty on April 10, 2010. The sentencing judge did not impose any driving suspension under the Criminal Code, however Mr. Quick’s counsel told him that he would lose his driver’s licence for one year under the provincial Highway Traffic Act. Mr. Quick’s counsel, however, had not told him that because he had two previous drinking and driving convictions, his driver’s licence would be suspended indefinitely under the HTA. In an affidavit filed as fresh evidence, Mr. Quick said that had he known his driver’s licence would be suspended indefinitely, he would not have pleaded guilty; he would have asked for a trial. The Ontario Court of Appeal held that Mr. Quick’s guilty plea to dangerous driving was not informed because he was not aware of the indefinite suspension of his driver’s licence that automatically followed under the HTA. Thus, his conviction for dangerous driving gave rise to a miscarriage of justice. The court allowed Mr. Quick’s appeal, set aside his guilty plea and conviction on the dangerous driving charge, and order a new trial. The court also gave this advice to sentencing judges on all driving (including impaired) offences:

I simply observe, that before an accused pleads guilty to a driving offence, a trial judge would be well advised to ensure that the accused understands the nature and length of any licence suspensions. R. v. Quick, 2016 ONCA 95