You wouldn't have a source for that tidbit, would you?
Carl – Do I detect a note of snarkyness in your question?
The CVC only indicates that the change be made upon request at the time of citation, not that there is any "right" to do this at a later time - before arraignment or not. Certainly they MAY allow a change of venue, but I don't see anything that requires they do so after the citation is issued.
CVC section 40502(b) states:
40502. The place specified in the notice to appear shall be any of the following:
(b) Upon demand of the person arrested, before a judge or other magistrate having jurisdiction of the offense at the county seat of the county in which the offense is alleged to have been committed. This subdivision applies only if the person arrested resides, or the person's principal place of employment is located, closer to the county seat than to the court or other magistrate nearest or most accessible to the place where the arrest is made.
This sets up the requirement that if the person arrested* either lives or works closer to the county seat, the officer must designate the county seat court as the place to appear if demanded by the person arrested. In other words, the court at the county seat is the court that has jurisdiction. But what if the officer does not designate the county seat court as the place to appear, does this then make it optional? Certainly not, for if it was optional, there would have been no point in the Legislature making it mandatory on the officer because the officer could then just ignore the demand and the defendant would have no remedy at law.
So we now look to the Penal code to tell us what to do in the situation where the officer fails to designate the proper court on the notice to appear. The next opportunity for the defendant to address this is at arraignment (in the court that was incorrectly designated).
Section 1462.2 of the Penal Code states that when the action is commenced in a court other than the proper court for trial, it may nevertheless be tried there, “unless the defendant,
at the time he pleads, (at arraignment) requests an order transferring the action or proceeding to the proper court.” It continues, “If after such request it appears that the action or proceeding was not commenced in the proper court, the court shall order the action or proceeding transferred to the proper court.” In the situation we are discussing, the “proper court” is the court at the county seat.
Transfer to the county seat court is therefore
not optional. The court
must transfer the case to the county seat if, at arraignment, the defendant requests such an order and the court determines that (1)he demanded the county seat at the time he received the citation, (2)he lives or works closer to the county seat, and (3)the officer failed to designate the county seat court as the place to appear.
But you don’t have to take my word for it. In
Smith v. Municipal Court [(1959) 167 Cal.App.2d 534, 538], the court held that the Vehicle Code required that “
f a demand therefore is made by the arrestee, the officer must specify as the place of appearance a municipal court within the judicial district at the county seat…” and further held the respondent court “was without discretion to deny the motion to transfer…” Note that this case was decided in 1959 and still holds precidence.
For clarification, I’ll also note that the court does not have to hear and grant this motion at the arraignment (although it may do so, especially if none of the facts are in dispute). The defendant must make the motion at arraignment and the court may set a separate date to hear the motion. However, as stated in Smith, the court is without discretion to deny the move to the county seat.
As for a denial of transfer being grounds for appeal, I won’t cite the case law on this, but it should be clear that if a court without jurisdiction tries and convicts a defendant, that verdict is likely to be overturned on appeal.
Remember, the law is more than just the codes, case law is important to note as well.
Hope this clarifies things.
----------
One other point of clarification for those reading along - The officer or the court can send the ticket to any court in the county seat, not necessarily the one closest to the defendant’s place of work or residence. Any (municipal) court in the county seat would have jurisdiction. Therefore, if you are cited to appear in any court in the county seat (some, like Los Angeles, have more than one), you have no statutory right to have it transferred elsewhere, even if another court in the (same) county seat is closer to your place of work or residence. Remember also, that all the courts we are discussing here are courts within the county in which the offense allegedly took place. You don’t get to transfer to a different county.
OK, one more point – What do you do if you make the request of the officer to set the place of appearance as the county seat and he refuses? A number of sources recommend that you sign the promise to appear, but add the notation, “County seat requested and refused” in small capital letters next to your name. That way, you’ll have indisputable proof on the citation that you made the demand. You could also refuse to sign until the officer gets the location correct, but you risk arrest for refusing to sign the ticket. Whatever you decide, always remain polite and non-confrontational. Being rude won’t get you anywhere (other than the pokey) and the officer is probably just unclear about the county seat court requirement, not just trying to be a jerk.
*For those reading this who might be unfamiliar with this phrase, “arrested” in the case of an infraction does not necessarily mean that you are taken into custody. Being given a citation by a police officer constitutes “arrest” for the purposes of the law even though you are just given the citation, sign it as a promise to appear and are released.
