Quick Question about my Day in Court

I am contesting a speeding violation in Pennsylvania.

If the Officer begins reading from his notes, I’m going to Object, based on a lack of Independent Recollection (i.e. the Officer is my accuser, not his or her notes).

However, I need to know if ***I*** am allowed to use my notes during the trial. Basically, I have written down everything that I want to say...

Can I use these notes when I:

- Object to the Officer’s testimony?
- Cross examine the Officer?
- Make a motion for dismissal?
- Present my Defense case?

Thanks in advance for your help,

===Terence===

HectorBerlioz said:

I am contesting a speeding violation in Pennsylvania.

If the Officer begins reading from his notes, I’m going to Object, based on a lack of Independent Recollection (i.e. the Officer is my accuser, not his or her notes).

Click to expand...

Yeah - let us know how THAT works out

Yeah, it might not go well, haha...

But, if the Judge lets the officer testify from his notes, then I can definitely make a motion for dismissal based on that fact, which may help me...It's a 6th amendment issue...

===Terence===

HectorBerlioz said:

Yeah, it might not go well, haha...

But, if the Judge lets the officer testify from his notes, then I can definitely make a motion for dismissal based on that fact, which may help me...It's a 6th amendment issue...

===Terence===

Click to expand...

The officer WON'T testify from his notes. But, he will be allowed to refer to his notes.

Yeah, that's probably true...

I can still make still make the objection though...who knows, it might be sustained...

But then the question still remains: What are *my* rights? Am I allowed to read directly from my notes, or may I only consult them?

Thanks,

===Terence===

I would suggest that you get comfortable enough with your testimony so that you only have to refer to your notes occasionally. If you try to testify directly from the notes, and you are interrupted with a question, etc., then you are really going to be thrown for a loop.

Yeah, I know...I have everything written out, now I just need to practice...

It’s Speech Class all over again...

===Terence===

Reading from your notes is fine, it's not testimony (unless of course you want to testify which...well...I wouldn't).

See, that’s the thing...If my case makes it past my initial motions for dismissal (after the officer testifies, and I cross examine), then *I* am going to have to testify. My case is based primarily on some issues regarding the speed detection equipment (ENRADD) that the officers used, as well as some inconsistencies with the actual roads. During this testimony, I was expecting to be able to read from my notes. Will this be permitted?

===Terence===

You would bring those questions up on your examination of the officer. You won't be testifying.

I understand what you are saying...However, it just doesn't seem like some of the points that I am trying to make will really "fit" into my questioning of the officer.

For example, regarding the roads, I am arguing that there were two different speed limits in effect at the point where two roads merged, which created a hazardous situation.

Here's another example: Regarding the speed detection equipment, I want to address some discrepancies concerning the classification of the ENRADD as a device that can be used by all police officers (in PA, not all officers can use all speed detection equipment). I have caught some highly contradictory wording in the PA statutes that I want to address...

When/how do I bring up these topics?

===Terence===

Hector...I mean, Monsieur Berlioz, sir: I really do love your music.

HectorBerlioz said:

I understand what you are saying...However, it just doesn't seem like some of the points that I am trying to make will really "fit" into my questioning of the officer.

For example, regarding the roads, I am arguing that there were two different speed limits in effect at the point where two roads merged, which created a hazardous situation.

Here's another example: Regarding the speed detection equipment, I want to address some discrepancies concerning the classification of the ENRADD as a device that can be used by all police officers (in PA, not all officers can use all speed detection equipment). I have caught some highly contradictory wording in the PA statutes that I want to address...

When/how do I bring up these topics?

===Terence===

Click to expand...

Brush up on the definition of TESTIMONY and ARGUMENT.

You may do both, of course, but at different times.

You are getting them confused.

Yeah, Berlioz (the real one, not me...haha) was a genius. Way ahead of his time...

And I guess I better do a little bit more research. I will report back soon with my findings.

Thanks,

===Terence===

Ok, I found this outline of the typical sequence of events for a traffic ticket trial:

• Bailiff Calls the Case
• Defense and the Prosecution respond with, “Ready, Your Honor.”
• Opening Statement by Prosecution
• Opening Statement by Defense
• Prosecution Case
• Witness - Police Officer’s Testimony
• Cross Examination by the Defense
• Re-Direct by the Prosecution
• Physical Evidence - Citation, Diagrams, etc.
• Prosecution Rests
• Motion to Dismiss by Defense on applicable grounds
• Defense Case
• Witness - You or passengers
• Cross Examination by Prosecution
• Re-Direct by Defense
• Defense Rests
• Rebuttal Witness by Prosecution
• Closing Arguments
• Prosecution
• Defense
• Prosecution (Follow up & response to Defense Closing)
• Verdict
• Sentencing

I know where the "Testimony" goes (When the defense calls witnesses...I would be the only witness to testify...). However, there doesn't seem to be a place where I can simply argue the points that I listed in my previous post...

Help...

===Terence===