• 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.

Failure to maintain Reasonable Control And Failure to reinstate

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

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Ohio

Two different charges, I plead not guilty to both and plan on fighting them without (can't afford) a lawyer.

1. Failure to maintain reasonable control. There was 8 inches of snow on the ground. Lane markers were completely not visible. Oncoming traffic was encroaching upon my lane of travel. I felt it was reasonable and prudent to edge over to the right as much as possible. Withuot seeing lane markers because of the snow I hit the shoulder and ended up on the side of the road, stuck in snow. I was there close to fourty-five minutes trying to get out. When the Police Officer showed up a passerby had hooked up a tow strap to our vehicles and we were trying to get my car out of the snow. The officer wrote me up for Failure to Maintain reasonable Control. One other thing, unrelated to the incident, but maybe to my defense is that when I picked up the car the next day from the impound lot it made a terrible racket, shook like a leaf and turned out the engine was shot.


I'm thinking of defending myself following way:


A. No witness. Police showed up 45 minutes after the fact. No witness or evidence that I did failed to control the vehicle. Any number of things could have happened for the car to end up on the side of the road, stuck in snow and at least a few of them include maintaining reasonable and prudent control of the vehicle. Is there any true evidence indicating how I was actually operating the vehicle?

B. My mechanic will testify that under the condition he found the vehicle in the following day it would have been reasonable to pull to the side of the road.

C. Given the traffic conditions. Given published tips from the Ohio BMV and the Ohio Department Of Public Safety I operated the vehicle exactly as I should have.

D. There are 2,799 appearances of the word "reasonable" in the Ohio Revised Code and not once is it defined.



2. Failure to Reinstate License.

This is the one I was arrested for.
A couple of years ago I got a DUI and my license was suspended. WHen the suspension was up I paid the reinstatement fee, showed proof of insurance and got my license back. As it turns out this was a mistake in comunications between the court and the BMV.

I paid fines and showed insurance in December 2008 and my license was reinstated.
The court sent the Disposition of my case to the BMV on January 22nd showing a suspension.
It turns out that when my license was reinstated they reinstated the Administrative License Suspension (from the arrest date) and had never been notified about the DUI suspension (from the conviction).
When they were notified (January 22) of the suspension from the conviction they transferred the reinstatement fees (you only have to pay once) to the DUI suspension but not the proof of insurance.
I was arrested on January 28th.
I called my probabtion officer on the 29th and my license was reinstated within hours when they did some research. Everyone seems to be pretty clear that this was a glich in communications and I don;t think I'll have a problem with the charge, though I still have to go to court to defend myself.

I've looked at the Ohio Revised Codes and to me it looks like they shouldn't have towed my car for this offense and the code indicates that if it's true that they shouldn't have then I should be repaid all costs arising from this.
Does anybody know how to go about making a claim? Also should I make the claim against the police (revised code doesn't allow for th impound in this offense), the BMV (I met my reinstatement criteria and they failed to update their records), the court (failed to notify the BMV in a reasonable time) or all three?


Any advice would be greatly appreciated - Thank you in advance
 


seniorjudge

Senior Member
A. No witness. Police showed up 45 minutes after the fact. No witness or evidence that I did failed to control the vehicle. Any number of things could have happened for the car to end up on the side of the road, stuck in snow and at least a few of them include maintaining reasonable and prudent control of the vehicle. Is there any true evidence indicating how I was actually operating the vehicle?

That MAY help you on the traffic charge; but don't count on it. The circumstantial evidence shows you were not driving safely.

As far as the license one goes: You either have the license or you do not. If you did not have it, then you are guilty. But, if as you say, you now have the license, it MAY be dismissed.
 

Zigner

Senior Member, Non-Attorney
A. No witness. Police showed up 45 minutes after the fact. No witness or evidence that I did failed to control the vehicle. Any number of things could have happened for the car to end up on the side of the road, stuck in snow and at least a few of them include maintaining reasonable and prudent control of the vehicle. Is there any true evidence indicating how I was actually operating the vehicle?

That MAY help you on the traffic charge; but don't count on it. The circumstantial evidence shows you were not driving safely.

As far as the license one goes: You either have the license or you do not. If you did not have it, then you are guilty. But, if as you say, you now have the license, it MAY be dismissed.
And I'd like to add for the OP. You should NOT lie in court and say you pulled over because your car had trouble. That would be perjury and courts frown upon perjury.
 
And I'd like to add for the OP. You should NOT lie in court and say you pulled over because your car had trouble. That would be perjury and courts frown upon perjury.
I wasn't planning on lying, I'd be attempting to show that there could be other explanations for a car being on the side of the road that do not include an operators failing to maintain reasonable control.

Is it true that I'd never have to testify against myself if I didn't choose to?
 

seniorjudge

Senior Member
I wasn't planning on lying, I'd be attempting to show that there could be other explanations for a car being on the side of the road that do not include an operators failing to maintain reasonable control.

Is it true that I'd never have to testify against myself if I didn't choose to?
http://tinyurl.com/dmlwp3
 

Zigner

Senior Member, Non-Attorney
I wasn't planning on lying, I'd be attempting to show that there could be other explanations for a car being on the side of the road that do not include an operators failing to maintain reasonable control.

Is it true that I'd never have to testify against myself if I didn't choose to?
No, but if you choose to testify, you will need to explain WHY you were on the side of the road. Not give various possibilities.
 
Did you tell the officer why you were on the side of the road?

No. When he showed up I was getting help from someone and he made the guy stop so I sort of felt that I might be getting a raw deal from the get go.
I was cooperative and friendly but that's all.
 

Zigner

Senior Member, Non-Attorney
No. When he showed up I was getting help from someone and he made the guy stop so I sort of felt that I might be getting a raw deal from the get go.
I was cooperative and friendly but that's all.
Well, that's a plus. However, you WILL need to testify to rebut the officers testimony. That's where the whole "perjury" thing comes in ;)
 
Well, that's a plus. However, you WILL need to testify to rebut the officers testimony. That's where the whole "perjury" thing comes in ;)

THank you so much for your responses.

Why do you think I need to testify to rebut the officers testimony?
As far as I see the only testimony he can give is the location and attitude of my car when he showed up, nothing as to how I actually operated the car.
Wouldn't it be as or more effective if I argued that from his account it could as easily be deduced that I was driving prudently and reasonable as it can that I was driving without reasonable care?
Isn't it possible that I can at least introduce doubt, don't they have to prove Beyond a shadow of doubt?

Thanks again.

I won't commit perjury, I can assure that to anybody
but I honestly feel like I was excersising reasonable care.
 

Zigner

Senior Member, Non-Attorney
THank you so much for your responses.

Why do you think I need to testify to rebut the officers testimony?
As far as I see the only testimony he can give is the location and attitude of my car when he showed up, nothing as to how I actually operated the car.
Wouldn't it be as or more effective if I argued that from his account it could as easily be deduced that I was driving prudently and reasonable as it can that I was driving without reasonable care?
Isn't it possible that I can at least introduce doubt, don't they have to prove Beyond a shadow of doubt?
Ok, how's that gonna work?

Perhaps by you testifying: "I could have been stuck at the side of the road with a bad engine". Ahh, but that would bring up the question "WERE you stuck at the side of the road with a bad engine".
How are you going to answer THAT question?
but I honestly feel like I was excersising reasonable care.
You may in fact have been. That's why you received the advice that you did. Tell the truth.
 

seniorjudge

Senior Member
...
I honestly feel like I was excersising reasonable care.
...


Your feelings are irrelevant.

If you had been exercising reasonable care, you would not have had a wreck.

Yes, you can have a jury trial.

Post your verdict director here; I want to take a look at it.
 
Your feelings are irrelevant.

If you had been exercising reasonable care, you would not have had a wreck.

Yes, you can have a jury trial.

Post your verdict director here; I want to take a look at it.
It wasn't a wreck by any stretch of the imagination.

Do you (or anybody) think a jury trial is advantageous or disadvantageous to me?

Excuse my ignorance but what exactly is a verdict director?



Thanks again
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

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