bigbadbrew
Junior Member
(Washington State)
I received a ticket for expired tabs.
I found that my notice of infraction is missing some key information required by the Washington State Supreme Court.
RCW 46.63.060 section (2) part (b) says that the traffic ticket must have -
(b) A statement that a traffic infraction is a noncriminal offense for which imprisonment may not be imposed as a sanction; that the penalty for a traffic infraction may include sanctions against the person's driver's license including suspension, revocation, or denial; that the penalty for a traffic infraction related to standing, stopping, or parking may include nonrenewal of the vehicle license;
None of the bolded text is included on the traffic infraction forms in Washington State.
Now also - in Washington State under IRLJ 2.1 section (a)
(a) Infraction Form Prescribed or approved by the Administrative Office of the
Courts. Infraction cases shall be filed on a form entitled "Notice of
Infraction" prescribed by the Administrative Office of the Courts; except that
the form used to file cases alleging the commission of a parking, standing or
stopping infraction shall be approved by the Administrative Office of the
Courts. Notice of Infraction forms prescribed or approved by the Administrative Office of the Courts are presumed valid and shall not be deemed insufficient by reason of defects or imperfections which do not prejudice substantial rights of the defendant.
So my fight in this case would be that by omitting almost all of 46.63.060 part (b) from my infraction notice that I'm not being advised of all the possible penalities or outcomes of my tickets and therefore the court is prejudicing substantially my rights.
The whole purpose of section 46.63.060 part (b) is to advise me of my rights so that I know what kind of situation I'm in and what possible sanctions might be taken against me.
If the Supreme Court of Washington determines that this information is necessary on the ticket to inform me of all possible outcomes and sanctions I would believe that the local courts and police officers are violating my rights by not properly informing me as required by the Supreme Court.
I asked on another forum and the poster there said that while most judges would merely see the omission of this information as NOT prejudicing my rights that maybe the lack of information has larger implications.
His post is below -
IRLJ 2.1 states (in part):
Quoting IRLJ 2.1 (a)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notice of Infraction forms prescribed or approved by the Administrative Office of the Courts are presumed valid and shall not be deemed insufficient by reason of defects or imperfections which do not prejudice substantial rights of the defendant.
A "presumption" can, however, be overcome where there is clear and convincing evidence to the contrary. In this case, the legislature has prescribed that the contents of a Notice of Infraction SHALL (meaning MUST) contain certain information and WARNINGS (see RCW 46.63.060 (2)(b)). The Supreme Court has ALSO declared that these statements and warnings are required (see IRLJ 2.1 (b)(8)).
The fact that these statements are MISSING, however, is NOT merely a "defect or imperfection". It is a violation of law. A "defect or imperfection" would be a "typo" or transposition or a missing word -- NOT the absense of statements and warnings that the legislature holds to be a "requirement". Therefore, there is no need to show prejudice of substantial rights.
The legislature specifically determined that these statements and warnings are NECESSARY for the preservation of individual rights and the promotion of justice. The Supreme Court has also ruled that these statements SHALL be included in the Notice of Infraction. For any court to decide that these statements are NOT necessary, that the form is valid WITHOUT them, means that court is virtually overturning a statute and ignoring a Supreme Court rule.
If this form was, indeed, "prescribed or approved" by the Administrative Office of the Courts, then that office made a mistake. A court should not further compound that mistake.
_____________________________________________________________
I plan to try to take this to court and fight the ticket but I'm wondering if anyone else has any thoughts on this case.
To me it's pretty clear that this information is required on the ticket by law and although the Administrative Office of Courts is "Presuming" that the notice is correct that doesn't mean that it is correct.
This to me is NOT a case of a imperfection or defect. That would be if a word was missing or the cop missed a letter in my name.
The notice is MISSING a complete section as required by the legislature and the Supreme Court.
TO ANY LAWYERS OR JUDGES WHO VISIT THIS FORUM - DO I HAVE CASE? Will a Judge listen to my argument and actually agree with me?
Does anyone have any case law I can quote that would help my cause?
Thank you so much!
I received a ticket for expired tabs.
I found that my notice of infraction is missing some key information required by the Washington State Supreme Court.
RCW 46.63.060 section (2) part (b) says that the traffic ticket must have -
(b) A statement that a traffic infraction is a noncriminal offense for which imprisonment may not be imposed as a sanction; that the penalty for a traffic infraction may include sanctions against the person's driver's license including suspension, revocation, or denial; that the penalty for a traffic infraction related to standing, stopping, or parking may include nonrenewal of the vehicle license;
None of the bolded text is included on the traffic infraction forms in Washington State.
Now also - in Washington State under IRLJ 2.1 section (a)
(a) Infraction Form Prescribed or approved by the Administrative Office of the
Courts. Infraction cases shall be filed on a form entitled "Notice of
Infraction" prescribed by the Administrative Office of the Courts; except that
the form used to file cases alleging the commission of a parking, standing or
stopping infraction shall be approved by the Administrative Office of the
Courts. Notice of Infraction forms prescribed or approved by the Administrative Office of the Courts are presumed valid and shall not be deemed insufficient by reason of defects or imperfections which do not prejudice substantial rights of the defendant.
So my fight in this case would be that by omitting almost all of 46.63.060 part (b) from my infraction notice that I'm not being advised of all the possible penalities or outcomes of my tickets and therefore the court is prejudicing substantially my rights.
The whole purpose of section 46.63.060 part (b) is to advise me of my rights so that I know what kind of situation I'm in and what possible sanctions might be taken against me.
If the Supreme Court of Washington determines that this information is necessary on the ticket to inform me of all possible outcomes and sanctions I would believe that the local courts and police officers are violating my rights by not properly informing me as required by the Supreme Court.
I asked on another forum and the poster there said that while most judges would merely see the omission of this information as NOT prejudicing my rights that maybe the lack of information has larger implications.
His post is below -
IRLJ 2.1 states (in part):
Quoting IRLJ 2.1 (a)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notice of Infraction forms prescribed or approved by the Administrative Office of the Courts are presumed valid and shall not be deemed insufficient by reason of defects or imperfections which do not prejudice substantial rights of the defendant.
A "presumption" can, however, be overcome where there is clear and convincing evidence to the contrary. In this case, the legislature has prescribed that the contents of a Notice of Infraction SHALL (meaning MUST) contain certain information and WARNINGS (see RCW 46.63.060 (2)(b)). The Supreme Court has ALSO declared that these statements and warnings are required (see IRLJ 2.1 (b)(8)).
The fact that these statements are MISSING, however, is NOT merely a "defect or imperfection". It is a violation of law. A "defect or imperfection" would be a "typo" or transposition or a missing word -- NOT the absense of statements and warnings that the legislature holds to be a "requirement". Therefore, there is no need to show prejudice of substantial rights.
The legislature specifically determined that these statements and warnings are NECESSARY for the preservation of individual rights and the promotion of justice. The Supreme Court has also ruled that these statements SHALL be included in the Notice of Infraction. For any court to decide that these statements are NOT necessary, that the form is valid WITHOUT them, means that court is virtually overturning a statute and ignoring a Supreme Court rule.
If this form was, indeed, "prescribed or approved" by the Administrative Office of the Courts, then that office made a mistake. A court should not further compound that mistake.
_____________________________________________________________
I plan to try to take this to court and fight the ticket but I'm wondering if anyone else has any thoughts on this case.
To me it's pretty clear that this information is required on the ticket by law and although the Administrative Office of Courts is "Presuming" that the notice is correct that doesn't mean that it is correct.
This to me is NOT a case of a imperfection or defect. That would be if a word was missing or the cop missed a letter in my name.
The notice is MISSING a complete section as required by the legislature and the Supreme Court.
TO ANY LAWYERS OR JUDGES WHO VISIT THIS FORUM - DO I HAVE CASE? Will a Judge listen to my argument and actually agree with me?
Does anyone have any case law I can quote that would help my cause?
Thank you so much!
