• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Red Zone Parking Violation

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

Baby Boomer

Junior Member
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? California
I was cited for parking in a no parking red zone at 8:00pm and dark. We were looking for handicap space when a car pulled out from a parking space to our front and we took it. Being a disabled fireman, my son and I looked at the curb to see if it were painted red. It was not. Also, we had low pressure sodium vapor street light light one hundred feet down the road, As a photographer, these lights are 2700 kelvin which is in the orange area of spectrum which wiped out any hint of red on the curb. We later came back to find a ticket on the windshield. I took pictures of the scene and came back to same location the following day and took additional photos of a faded(more white than pink) curb,along with photos of red curbs at other locations. There was no "Red Zone No Parking" signs. The appeal process has three stages. You have to pay fine to make your first appeal. Of course it was denied. The second step requires a Written Declaration, again denied.
I applied for a court hearing for an additional $25. As a plaintive, I have to request evidence from the defense (City of San Jose). They have yet to provide copy of painting record from the log book. They did send a copy of their photo that is of such poor quality that the car looks red instead of green, and the license plate is so white that you can not read anything on the plate. I cannot recognize the vehicle as my vehicle in the Defenses photo. I came by the crimes scene a few weeks later to find the curb painted red. Any suggestions? My argument is that once the parking officer photographed the scene, she in fact changed the scene by adding flash along with flashlight. Any suggestions?: Baby Boomer
 
Last edited:


CdwJava

Senior Member
About all you can do is present your argument with whatever evidence and discussion you can make.

Were there any signs that also designated the area as no parking or as a fire lane?
 

Baby Boomer

Junior Member
Red zone violation

Thank you for your reply. There are no signs on photographs indicating "no parking." Also, that parking space was painted red by someone while I was still in the process of appeal. I have photos of this new painting activity after driving thirty miles on a hunch that this would happen. Am I wasting time with standing, cause of action, or just go with the facts? My son is a witness. Definately bring him to court?
Thank you , Baby Boomer
 
Last edited:

CdwJava

Senior Member
I don't kno where you might be trying to go with "standing" and "cause of action," but that sounds like a long and expensive road to travel down for a parking cite. I'd simply go with the facts as you outlined them and explain that the curb was faded when you parked there and it did not appear to be red. It'd be nice if you could find some official notice of the re-painting, but SJ is a HUGE bureaucracy, so that may not be available to you in short order. You might try one of the City Councilman's offices.
 

Baby Boomer

Junior Member
Paint History Logbook

Thank you again,
Yesterday, I was on the phone with City of San Jose DOT office of records. I also faxed that official, as mutually agreed, a request of all painting history of red curb at 56 S. Montgomery Street from the Painting logbook. Other requested information was also requested and hopefully all of it will come in snail mail. I cannot expect a fair hearing because the judge, along with the prosecutor represents a conflict of interest by acquiring their respective status through taking the same state oath of office limiting their jurisdiction to protecting and maintaining individual rights as per state and federal constitution. What is the judge doing in a court of law as a money collector for the City of San Jose , a corporation. Both the judge and prosecutor acquired their status by taking the same oath of office, thus mutually bonded as plaintive state against me as defendant. The whole appeal process has defined me as guilty, not innocent until proven guilty. The burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt weighs on the plaintive state. To get to that point, the plaintive must establish "standing" in court by arguing a cause of action by proving the following three elements of cause of action:
1. A violation of a legal right. 2. damage or injury. 3. redress- ability of redress. If the prosecutor cannot establish a cause of action, then the case has no standing. Thus, it follows, after establishing no one's legal rights have been violated everything after that is beside the point. The only question I have at this point is this: In a parking violation hearing in California, are parking officers have have a duty to file a cause of action? I think I will argue the facts in this case. It is ironic in that by the plaintive (City of San Jose) is in a position of providing evidentiary material to the defendant (me) that would threaten the collection of $55.00 for their ticket cash cow.


Thank you, Baby Boomer
 
Last edited:

Zigner

Senior Member, Non-Attorney
Thank you again,
Yesterday, I was on the phone with City of San Jose DOT office of records. I also faxed that official, as mutually agreed, a request of all painting history of red curb at 56 S. Montgomery Street from the Painting logbook. Other requested information was also requested and hopefully all of it will come in snail mail. I cannot expect a fair hearing because the judge, along with the prosecutor represents a conflict of interest by acquiring their respective status through taking the same state oath of office limiting their jurisdiction to protecting and maintaining individual rights as per state and federal constitution. What is the judge doing in a court of law as a money collector for the City of San Jose , a corporation. Both the judge and prosecutor acquired their status by taking the same oath of office, thus mutually bonded as plaintive state against me as defendant. The whole appeal process has defined me as guilty, not innocent until proven guilty. The burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt weighs on the plaintive state. To get to that point, the plaintive must establish "standing" in court by arguing a cause of action by proving the following three elements of cause of action:
1. A violation of a legal right. 2. damage or injury. 3. redress- ability of redress. If the prosecutor cannot establish a cause of action, then the case has no standing. Thus, it follows, after establishing no one's legal rights have been violated everything after that is beside the point. The only question I have at this point is this: In a parking violation hearing in California, are parking officers have have a duty to file a cause of action? I think I will argue the facts in this case.
Thank you, Baby Boomer
Alrighty then :rolleyes:
 

CdwJava

Senior Member
I cannot expect a fair hearing because the judge, along with the prosecutor represents a conflict of interest by acquiring their respective status through taking the same state oath of office limiting their jurisdiction to protecting and maintaining individual rights as per state and federal constitution.
What kind of claptrap is that???

First, there will be no prosecutor. IF anyone shows up for the city, it would be a city attorney. This is a civil matter, NOT a criminal one.

Second, how is it a "conflict of interest" to swear to uphold and defend the United States and California Constitutions? I took the same oath ... does that mean I shouldn't be allowed to arrest people and have them appear before a court?

Third, the judge doesn't work for the city and has no vested interest in the fine since the court and the county will receive, maybe, less than $10 from that parking cite.

What is the judge doing in a court of law as a money collector for the City of San Jose , a corporation.
Do not even try and go into court using a sovereign citizen argument. It'll fail and you'll lose. Argue the facts like the faded curb, not money collectors, oaths, corporations and contracts.

Oh, and he's NOT a "money collector."

The whole appeal process has defined me as guilty, not innocent until proven guilty. The burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt weighs on the plaintive state.
Actually, since it's a civil matter the burden is by a "preponderance of the evidence," not, "beyond a reasonable doubt." That's significantly less.

The only question I have at this point is this: In a parking violation hearing in California, are parking officers have have a duty to file a cause of action?
No.

I think I will argue the facts in this case.
Facts such as the painting of the curb, yes. "Facts" like oaths, common law, cause of action, etc., no. If you try the former you might prevail ... the latter, and you'll lose.
 

Baby Boomer

Junior Member
Go with the facts

Can I ask the judge if on scene complaining party, citation officer, is present for me to cross examine? If not, can I then make a motion to dismiss the case on the following grounds? 1. I cannot recognize the vehicle provided by prosecution, 2. Along with the fact the complaining party did not show up for hearing for me to cross examine his/her testimony about the facts the, e.g. the photograph. The prosecuting attorney cannot expect to answer my cross examination about all the elements of their complaint with out becoming incompetent to testify. Yes, I will argue the facts.
Thank you for telling it as you see it. You have been very helpful.

Baby Boomer
 

CdwJava

Senior Member
Can I ask the judge if on scene complaining party, citation officer, is present for me to cross examine?
If the officer is required to be present, you will likely have a chance to ask him questions.

If not, can I then make a motion to dismiss the case on the following grounds? 1. I cannot recognize the vehicle provided by prosecution,
You can ASK anything. But, even if the photo is washed out, the plate and info on the citation will be hard to argue about. Now, if the photo showed a pickup truck and your vehicle was a Kia Sorento, you might have an argument.

2. Along with the fact the complaining party did not show up for hearing for me to cross examine his/her testimony about the facts the, e.g. the photograph.
You can ask. Whether the citing officer will be present or not, I can't say. The court doesn't HAVE to dismiss if the witness is not present.

The prosecuting attorney cannot expect to answer my cross examination about all the elements of their complaint with out becoming incompetent to testify.
There will not BE a "prosecuting attorney." This is not a criminal prosecution.
 

Baby Boomer

Junior Member
I will let you know how this ends. Again, thank you for spending your time and thoughts on this matter. Baby Boomer

Oh, just one last question Before we part ways. I find it disturbing that people who apply laws to peaceful strangers cannot provide evidence the law applies. And that is the following: Just because I was physically in San Jose, and ticketed for this parking violation, what FACTUAL EVIDENCE can you show me, that ordinances, local laws, laws, in the California State Constitution,and U.S Constitution apply to me just because I am in San Jose? Can you show me the FACTUAL EVIDENCE to show me laws apply to me?
 
Last edited:

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top