Future date on traffic ticket

[floridanative64]

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

I received a traffic ticket for speeding on 07/12/2008, but the office dated the ticket 11/12/08. I have opted for a court hearing, because I could not have been at that location on that date since it has not yet occurred. I have a court date set, and believe that the office has to attest that I was at that location, on that date....and since it hasn't happened yet - I am innocent. Any ideas?

 

[Zigner]

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

I received a traffic ticket for speeding on 07/12/2008, but the office dated the ticket 11/12/08. I have opted for a court hearing, because I could not have been at that location on that date since it has not yet occurred. I have a court date set, and believe that the office has to attest that I was at that location, on that date....and since it hasn't happened yet - I am innocent. Any ideas?

Good luck - but you are certainly grasping at straws...

 

[The Occultist]

The fact is, if it didn't happen, then how do you have the ticket?

 

[JIMinCA]

You have the perfect defense. You go to court only to defend yourself against that violation which you have been charged. You could be caught plunging a bloody knife into a person's chest, but if you are charged with murdering someone on a different day in a different city... you are not guilty.

You were charged with speeding at a location and a time as designated on the ticket. That's what you have to defend yourself against. For that, you are obviously not guilty. Now, had the officer charged you with speeding on 7/12/08, then you may rightly plead guilty. But, regardless of intent, you were charged with a violation that occurs in the future. Why would you not defend yourself against that?

 

[The Occultist]

Jim, do you truly believe any judge is going to agree with your logic??

Anywho, when confronted in court, the "date" is usually presented as something along the lines of "on or around blah blah blah" so if the cite has an incorrect date, it will typically not serve as a valid defense against the cite because, as I already stated, if you were not there on that date then you couldn't have that signed copy of the ticket, so a big "duh" on that one, n'est-ce pas?

But, let's go ahead and pretend Jim is correct on this, and you are able to get a judge to agree that the ticket is incorrect based on the date; do you know what will happen then? You will get issued a BRAND NEW ticket with the CORRECT date! Some prize, eh?

Instead of trying to use a stupid technicality that will merely prolong the inevitable, how about finding a true defense to the charges, yes?

Jim, I assure you I mean absolutely no disrespect towards you! Whether or not other members (including myself) agree with your methods, you do have quite the streak of providing reliable information; in this post, I am merely stating my disagreement with this one bit of information you tried to provide!

 

[JIMinCA]

Jim, do you truly believe any judge is going to agree with your logic??

Anywho, when confronted in court, the "date" is usually presented as something along the lines of "on or around blah blah blah" so if the cite has an incorrect date, it will typically not serve as a valid defense against the cite because, as I already stated, if you were not there on that date then you couldn't have that signed copy of the ticket, so a big "duh" on that one, n'est-ce pas?

But, let's go ahead and pretend Jim is correct on this, and you are able to get a judge to agree that the ticket is incorrect based on the date; do you know what will happen then? You will get issued a BRAND NEW ticket with the CORRECT date! Some prize, eh?

Instead of trying to use a stupid technicality that will merely prolong the inevitable, how about finding a true defense to the charges, yes?

Jim, I assure you I mean absolutely no disrespect towards you! Whether or not other members (including myself) agree with your methods, you do have quite the streak of providing reliable information; in this post, I am merely stating my disagreement with this one bit of information you tried to provide!

I don't think it is my logic that the court would have to agree with.... I think it is the law. The court can only try you on the charge that has been properly presented in court.

Let's talk about it hypothetically. Let's say the cop didn't write a future date. Let's say his date was a week off. Let's even say that he went to court and testified to the incorrect date. The defendant shows the court plane tickets, hotel bills and rental car reciepts that prove he was in florida on that date. What should the court do?

The point is, you can be speeding today and be charged. You can also be speeding tomorrow in the same spot at the same speed and be charged by the same cop. But... they are TWO SEPERATE CHARGES. The cop cannot present evidence from one to convict on the other. Simply put, the cop is alleging that the OP was speeding at a specific location at a specific time. If the OP pleads not guilty to that, he is right. Just because he was speeding at a different time is irrelevant. The time and place on the ticket is what he was charged with.