If you get a traffic ticket in CA, you should read this post

[geneneuro]

What is the name of your state?What is the name of your state? CA

The reason why I am writing this post is I can no longer tolerate to see how many distructive responses some so-called "responders" have posted here to discourage people from fighting their tickets, or at least to know about the rights one can have after receiving a traffic ticket. So I wanna put up something that I've learned when I was preparing for fighting my case (I just had a trial yesterday and won~).

(1) If you are living around the Bay Area (San Francisco and near by), I strongly advice you to attend a class offered by the San Francisco Superior Court Traffic Division. In the class there is an experienced traffic attorney to teach you all the procedures involved after you get a traffic ticket, and what you should and can do about it no matter if you plan to fight for it or not. Most importantly, the class is FREE~!! (URL: [url]http://www.sfgov.org/site/courts_page.asp?id=13336[/url]). I attended the class and got a lot of USEFUL and CONSTRUCTIVE advices from there. The attorney is even nice enough that if she has extra time left after the time, she would spend a few minutes to look at your case and let you know what she thinks would be the best way to prepare defenses for your ticket (if you are planning to fight it).

(2) Know about the code you are being charged for, and see if you did commit ALL the elements you are being cited. As said by the attorney, the burden of proofs always lay on the officer, not the defendant. It's the officer's duty to proof you have commited the violation BEYONG ANY REASONABLE DOUBTS.

(3) Be prepared for the trial if you are planning to fight it. Dress as if you would attend a business meeting. The first impression to the commissioner/judge is very important. Also it'll be helpful to use diagrams or pictures to illustrate any arguements you are trying to make.

(4) You should know that you have the right to request informal discoverey regarding your citation if you plan to fight it at a trial. Do it as early as possible after you have scheduled a trial. It needs to be at least 30 days before it. It's true that most time the policing agency would ignore it. But if that's the case, the attorney said you are entitled to use that as a motion of dismiss (pre-trial motion). Like in my case, I got deferred between different policing agencies for obtaining my informal discovery. They even ended up only mailed me an ILLEGIBLE copy of the officer's backnotes, and claimed they don't keep copy of any court reports they filed. But again as what the attorney told us, the officer DOES have a copy, and as I saw yesterday in court 80% of the officers did bring their own copies of any written documents they submitted to court at the trial. So if you end up in a similar situation like mine, you could also use it as a motion to dismiss since by law the policing agency is required to provide you all evidences the officer has submitted/will use to go against you.

(5) Some so-called "responders" responded to my previous post in early June saying informal discovery requests needed to be submitted to the DA. Let me tell you that at least from my experience and at least in San Francisco as taught by the class OFFERED BY THE COURT, you DON'T NEED TO. You can simply do it by submitting it to the police department. San Franciscans, if you don't trust me, attend the class and see.

(6) I saw another user posted a message before that in her case the officer used "He" to refer to gender of the defendant on the court report while the user is a "She". There were a lot of so-called "helpful" responders (even one said he's a North Cal officer) said that "He" can be used as a generic pronoun in refering to gender. Well, same thing happened to my case, and if I was naive enough to believe the advices given by those so-called "helpful" repsonders' advices, I probably wouldn't have walked out the court room yesterday and won the case. The reason is, as instrcuted by the attorney offered the class in San Francisco, every elements on the court report that the officer filed NEEDS TO BE FACTUALLY ACCURATE, including the gender of the defendant. Thus, "He" and "SHE" CANNOT be used interchangably~! I even asked a friend who's currently a law-student and I got the same information as well. Thus, if there's any factual mistakes happen on a court report, it can be used a challenge to dismiss the case already, or at least to preclude the officer's testimony at the trial since s/he has already failed to have accurate recollection of the incident regarding the citation when the officer was writing up the report.

(7) COPS are NOT ALLOWED to make any changes onto the citation onces they submitted it. There's a California Vehicle Code for it (I forgot to write it down though but again, if you are bay area people I advice you attend the class and ask the attorney for the code). If the cops make any changes on his copy of the citation after the cops gave you the ticket, it's ILLEGAL, and you can use it as a challenge to dismiss the case.

(8) For speeding case, if the cops claim they use radar or gun to determine your speed but wrote something like "80+" on your ticket, you can use it as a defence since NO radar or gun will have a reading called "80+". THe reading must have to be a specific numbers~!!

(9) Also "quota" tickets are illegal in California. For any 1-point infraction, a police officer could give out a warning ticket instead of a citation if you politely ask him/her for it. You can ask the officer if you can get a warning instead of a citation for the 1-point infraction, and if the officer still insisted of giving you a citation without a good reason, you can then say this code (VC 41602) and remind the officer that quota tickets are illegal. (I found out this from Ticket Assassin: [url]http://www.ticketassassin.com/visorguide.html[/url]).

(10) I highly recommend the Nolo book by Brown "Fight your Traffic ticket in California". I used a lot of constructive advices and strategies from the book. Without those advices and strategies I wouldn't have won the case yesterday.



The reason why I wanna throw in my two cents is because I feel like most of the responders in this forum they tend to give out advices that tend to discourage people from fighting their tickets. Moreover, a lot of the advices, especially involving officers' jurisdiction or what the officers can do are simply not true. If I would have believed THOSE responses/advices I have obtained from this forum, I probably would have been discouraged to fight for my case and ended up paying fine for violation that I DIDN'T have committed. So yea, think twice before you would receive any responses from this forum, especially knowing that we have no idea who are the responders' identity who wrote to you. Also, spend some time to do some researches and I am sure you can find more useful and helpful opinions than those you might obtain from this forum. Consult a lawyer if needed, which I think it worths if in fact you did not do what you were being cited for.

Hope all the info would help~ Again, just wanna say I am not a lawyer myself, and what I have written as just based on the advices I obtained from the SF court class, the Nolo book, as well as my personal experience. I just want to help as much as I can to people who got a citation and have no clues what they can do about it, and I am prepared for any negative/distructive responses from those so-called "helpful" responders on this forum.

[CdwJava]

Originally Posted by geneneuro

It's the officer's duty to proof you have commited the violation BEYONG ANY REASONABLE DOUBTS.

Actually, the offense must be demonstrated beyond A reasonable doubt ... not, "any" reasonable doubt.

(4) You should know that you have the right to request informal discoverey regarding your citation if you plan to fight it at a trial. Do it as early as possible after you have scheduled a trial. It needs to be at least 30 days before it. It's true that most time the policing agency would ignore it.

Careful ... it's not that it is ignored, it is that it is very often improperly requested. Too many people think that by simply sending notice to the police department that this is sufficient - it is not. An improper request for discovery does not require a response.

(5) Some so-called "responders" responded to my previous post in early June saying informal discovery requests needed to be submitted to the DA. Let me tell you that at least from my experience and at least in San Francisco as taught by the class OFFERED BY THE COURT, you DON'T NEED TO. You can simply do it by submitting it to the police department.

It needs to be properly formatted, AND, there are varying court requirements for this Discovery. There is also some legal question as to HOW Discovery must be handled in infractions. San Francisco may handle this different than other jurisdictions.

The reason is, as instrcuted by the attorney offered the class in San Francisco, every elements on the court report that the officer filed NEEDS TO BE FACTUALLY ACCURATE, including the gender of the defendant. Thus, "He" and "SHE" CANNOT be used interchangably~! I even asked a friend who's currently a law-student and I got the same information as well.

Fortunately legal opinions vary.

"He" can be generic. Clerical errors are not generally a fatal flaw in traffic cases - or any others for that matter. If I refer to someone as "he" in the narrative of my report, and the suspect is a "she", this is NOT going to result in a dismissal.

So, while the San Francisco courts may be anal retentive in this regard, the other courts in the state are not.

One definition from Webster's: "Used to refer to a person whose gender is unspecified or unknown: “He who desires but acts not, breeds pestilence”"

Thus, if there's any factual mistakes happen on a court report, it can be used a challenge to dismiss the case already,or at least to preclude the officer's testimony at the trial since s/he has already failed to have accurate recollection of the incident regarding the citation when the officer was writing up the report.

Sure, it can be USED to make a challenge, but this is a far cry from success.

I have had attorneys make motions to dismiss because I did not make note of innoucuous things such as the color of a suspect's wallet, or in which hand which he presented his identification. They each argued that my report and testimony could not be relied upon as factually accurate because of those missing elements. Needless to say, the arguments did little more than amuse the judges ... oh, and these were from misdemeanor and felony criminal cases and not traffic offenses.

If the cops make any changes on his copy of the citation after the cops gave you the ticket, it's ILLEGAL, and you can use it as a challenge to dismiss the case.

Partly right. he cannot make alterations to the cite that he provided to the court. He can make notes or alterations to HIS copy of the ticket all he wants (or at least as far as the agency will let him). The requirement is that the copy provided to the court must be the same as that which the defendant received.

(8) For speeding case, if the cops claim they use radar or gun to determine your speed but wrote something like "80+" on your ticket, you can use it as a defence since NO radar or gun will have a reading called "80+". THe reading must have to be a specific numbers~!!

Again, you can USE the argument, but it does not mean that you will succeed. And anyone who knows about radar will also know that the officer is making a visual estimation of the defendant's speed - and this estimation CAN be more than 80 MPH. He would likely have to testify as to the confirmation of the radar lock (if he received one - it IS possible that he never locked the 'hit' in and only watched the fluctuating signal), but his estimation can vary and CAN be in excess of 80 MPH.

(9) Also "quota" tickets are illegal in California. For any 1-point infraction, a police officer could give out a warning ticket instead of a citation if you politely ask him/her for it.

Heck, you can ask him to give you a warning on ANYTHING!

You can ask the officer if you can get a warning instead of a citation for the 1-point infraction, and if the officer still insisted of giving you a citation without a good reason, you can then say this code (VC 41602) and remind the officer that quota tickets are illegal. (I found out this from Ticket Assassin: [url]http://www.ticketassassin.com/visorguide.html[/url]).

I would politely nod and agree with you that quotas are illegal. Then I would instruct you to "Press hard - three copies."

All because you ASK the officer to warn you instead of issuing a citation does NOT compel him to do so!

The reason why I wanna throw in my two cents is because I feel like most of the responders in this forum they tend to give out advices that tend to discourage people from fighting their tickets.

Heck, I don't want to do that! I like people fighting their tickets! I get paid for going to court on days off ... well, I work during court hours these days, but my officers get overtime for court so they thank everyone who challenges their tickets!

Consult a lawyer if needed, which I think it worths if in fact you did not do what you were being cited for.

Sure, always consult an attorney. They can be given all the facts. An internet forum is not the place for legal advice and I don't think anyone here would ever dispute that.

I just want to help as much as I can to people who got a citation and have no clues what they can do about it, and I am prepared for any negative/distructive responses from those so-called "helpful" responders on this forum.

Nope. No "negative" or "distructive [sic]" responses from me. Only addendum and clarification.

- Carl

[JETX]

Just what we need.... another high school dropout (from his spelling and grammar), who thinks he is an expert at traffic law, just because he attended a free seminar.

[CdwJava]

Heck, we don't care if people fight their cites - it's just that some of the information YOU provided was NOT reality everywhere (not even in CA). And, since much of it was the apparent opinion of a traffic attorney in San Francisco (and likely addresses SF specific court procedures) it may NOT valid everywhere else in the state.

Additionally, the difference between a law STUDENT and one who is a currently practicing member of the Bar is vast! Not to mention that attorneys that do not deal with traffic issues very often may not be too up on the state of the law. Keep in mind that many attorneys specialize in areas of law. An attorney that primarily practices internet law is going to be much more knowledgeable in that area than an attorney that primarily practices, say, personal injury law. It's a fact of life.

As I keep saying, PLEASE - EVERYONE! - Contest your citations! It is your right! And we need the overtime. Win or lose, we get paid time-and-a-half.

- Carl

[JETX]

Here is the post made by this idiot.... then deleted. I thought his response was simply too stupid to ignore.... and a perfect example of what I said:
"maybe indeed YOU are the high school dropout based on your response. First, your respsonse could be considered as language discrimination. Second, I actually have a bachelor degree from Unversity of California at BERKELEY. Third, the law student I consulted, is also currently a law student at Boalt Hall School of Law at Cal, just in case you wanna know."

For a claimed graduate of UC-Berkeley:
1) He can't spell 'response'.
2) He clearly has NO idea what 'language discrimination' is (if there were such a thing), as my post clearly is NOT discriminatory in any way.
3) He can't spell 'University'.
4) He doesn't realize that there is no such university as that he claims to have graduated from. The PROPER name is 'University of California, Berkeley'.
5) He doesn't realize that a law STUDENT is just that.... a student!!
6) And finally, there is no such thing as "Boalt Hall School of Law at Cal".
However, there IS a "School of Law at University of California, Berkeley". Boalt Hall is simply the name of the building where the school of law is housed.

Too, too funny!!

[DRTDEVL]

What's even more funny is when a poster rags on another's spelling, but can't get it right...


Batchelor's = Bachelor's

And, straight from UC Berkeley's website...

"Law School (Boalt Hall)"

[Pugilist]

I would ask geneneuro to tell us, at his trial session, how many officers failed to show for other cases.

P

[poppakeith]

Originally Posted by CdwJava

Heck, I don't want to do that! I like people fighting their tickets! I get paid for going to court on days off ... well, I work during court hours these days, but my officers get overtime for court so they thank everyone who challenges their tickets!
- Carl

That ought to be changed, Cal, don't you think? I mean, we are talking about a dispute between two parties, cop and private citizen, one of them seeking a just resolution. The citizen don't get paid to go to court, and would rather not be there, yet goes to the trouble to uphold justice, whereas the cop has nothing but his greed to satisfy, with overtime pay. Don't you think the cops would quit writing bogus citations, if government halted the monetary inducement for them to do so?

[JETX]

Originally Posted by poppakeith

That ought to be changed, Cal, don't you think?

Take it up with your state legislator.

[Curt581]

Originally Posted by poppakeith

Don't you think the cops would quit writing bogus citations, if government halted the monetary inducement for them to do so?

You're right.

Instead of imposing monetary fines, speeders should have their driver's licenses suspended for 30 days, everytime they get a ticket. Or we could impound their vehicle for 30 days everytime they get stopped. Let's get idiot drivers off the road.

Even better, let's Jail them.

[TYRIS]

Originally Posted by Curt581

You're right.

Instead of imposing monetary fines, speeders should have their driver's licenses suspended for 30 days, everytime they get a ticket. Or we could impound their vehicle for 30 days everytime they get stopped. Let's get idiot drivers off the road.

Even better, let's Jail them.

-I vote for jail.


Tyris

[CdwJava]

Originally Posted by poppakeith

That ought to be changed, Cal, don't you think? I mean, we are talking about a dispute between two parties, cop and private citizen, one of them seeking a just resolution. The citizen don't get paid to go to court, and would rather not be there, yet goes to the trouble to uphold justice, whereas the cop has nothing but his greed to satisfy, with overtime pay. Don't you think the cops would quit writing bogus citations, if government halted the monetary inducement for them to do so?

So ... you would advocate that the officer does NOT get paid to go to court?

That might actually violate state and federal law, so I can't see THAT happening.

Besides, there are plenty of legitimate tickets we can write without having to make them up. Sure, some officers may be in error ...and there may BE some that make them up (though I cannot conceive why!) ... but, there are enough violations that I see every day that should I want to, I could write a dozen legitimate cites a shift - I certainly don't need to make any up.

And relatively few actually go to court, so the overtime IS rather mimimal. When I worked Patrol I used to write, maybe, 3 or 4 per shift ... less than 5% ever went to court.

- Carl

[Brunette26CA]

You wrote that you had been to the ticket assain. Did you become a member and sign up for their shareware info on how to fight tickets?

I can't afford it (I can't even afford to pay my ticket)! WOuld you ever lend out info to me if you already know it.

[Brunette26CA]

CA

You wrote that you had been to the ticket assain. Did you become a member and sign up for their shareware info on how to fight tickets?

I can't afford it (I can't even afford to pay my ticket)! WOuld you ever lend out info to me if you already know it.