N
novarcr63
Guest
This is in NJ. I'm trying to decide if I should appeal my speeding ticket. It was a radar ticket.
Prior to the trial I made a motion for discovery. The prosecutor only partially responded.
At the second appearance, I requested that my discovery request be fully responded to and cited relevent case laws and the NJ municipal court rules of discovery. The judge ruled in my favor. The prosescutor then sent additional items, but still did not fully respond.
At the third apperance I informed the jugde that I still had not been been provided with all the discovery I requested. The judge then stated that he was not happy because I had not submitted a brief about the missing items. I then itemized the missing items (fcc liscense, traffic and engineering surveys and a letter from the NJ dot to the town informing them of a change in speed limits).
The judge then denied my request for these items, giving no reason. The NJ municipal court rules of discovery state that any discovery request by a pro-se defendent should be served on the prosecutor and that the defendant should be provided with any documents in the possesion of any government agency.
At that point I had to go to trial.
In the trial, any attempt by me to enter evidence was denied. None of the discovery I recieved from the prosecuor was allowed to be admitted into evidence. I was not allowed to enter into evidence the owners manual to the radar gun. I was not allowed to enter into evidence photos of the area. I repeatedly stated the relevence of the evidence. (the owners manual of the states that power lines can cause false readings, blowing dust and hills affect the range) The photos showed dust in the roadway, a hill in the roadway and powerlines and transformers 20 feet from the officers location.
The prosecutor was allowed to enter various documents into evidence reagarding tuning forks calibrations and training.
In cross examination I got the officer to testify that he had no independent recollection of the facts of the ticket other than his notes on the rear of the summons. Yet his testimony was allowed.
The officer read directly from the summons and directly from a radar claibration checklist during his testimony. I objected to this on the basis of directed testimony and independent recollection. I was overruled. No reason was given.
The officer testified that I admitted going 50 mph and that I admitted I did not know the speed limit was 35. I objected to this as hearsay and was overruled. No reason was given.
The officer stated that he calibrated the radar at the begining and end of his shift. I cited case laws that showed he should have calibrated befor and after the ticket.
Should I appeal this ticket? Do I have any grounds for appeal?
Any advice would be great!!
Thanks,
Tom
Prior to the trial I made a motion for discovery. The prosecutor only partially responded.
At the second appearance, I requested that my discovery request be fully responded to and cited relevent case laws and the NJ municipal court rules of discovery. The judge ruled in my favor. The prosescutor then sent additional items, but still did not fully respond.
At the third apperance I informed the jugde that I still had not been been provided with all the discovery I requested. The judge then stated that he was not happy because I had not submitted a brief about the missing items. I then itemized the missing items (fcc liscense, traffic and engineering surveys and a letter from the NJ dot to the town informing them of a change in speed limits).
The judge then denied my request for these items, giving no reason. The NJ municipal court rules of discovery state that any discovery request by a pro-se defendent should be served on the prosecutor and that the defendant should be provided with any documents in the possesion of any government agency.
At that point I had to go to trial.
In the trial, any attempt by me to enter evidence was denied. None of the discovery I recieved from the prosecuor was allowed to be admitted into evidence. I was not allowed to enter into evidence the owners manual to the radar gun. I was not allowed to enter into evidence photos of the area. I repeatedly stated the relevence of the evidence. (the owners manual of the states that power lines can cause false readings, blowing dust and hills affect the range) The photos showed dust in the roadway, a hill in the roadway and powerlines and transformers 20 feet from the officers location.
The prosecutor was allowed to enter various documents into evidence reagarding tuning forks calibrations and training.
In cross examination I got the officer to testify that he had no independent recollection of the facts of the ticket other than his notes on the rear of the summons. Yet his testimony was allowed.
The officer read directly from the summons and directly from a radar claibration checklist during his testimony. I objected to this on the basis of directed testimony and independent recollection. I was overruled. No reason was given.
The officer testified that I admitted going 50 mph and that I admitted I did not know the speed limit was 35. I objected to this as hearsay and was overruled. No reason was given.
The officer stated that he calibrated the radar at the begining and end of his shift. I cited case laws that showed he should have calibrated befor and after the ticket.
Should I appeal this ticket? Do I have any grounds for appeal?
Any advice would be great!!
Thanks,
Tom