Red light camera ticket mailed 30 days past date of violation, need advice.

[freddaman05]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? California
San Francisco CA Red light camera ticket VC 21453A, viol date 8-11-09, respond to court by 9-9-09, the envelope postage meter mailed date 9-11-09. Ticket mailed beyond 15 days as per cvc 40518, how does CVC 40518 apply in such a situation? Is the service of the ticket defective?

 

[demurringdude]

Is your address up-to-date with the DMV? If this was the first mailing of the ticket, sent to the registered owner at the address on the vehicle registration, and it was after 15 days, then the service is defective and can be challenged. There are a number of ways to do that.

If you had moved without updating the vehicle registration, and they had to make additional attempts to mail you the ticket, that would be different. Or if you aren't the registered owner, and the registered owner had the ticket redirected to you.

 

[freddaman05]

additional info

The citation has my rural address that the USPS does not deliver to. The envelope has a label on the address window with my correct mailing address on file with the DMV. I do not know if there were additional attempts to mail the ticket to me.

 

[demurringdude]

First the good news - the ticket is invalid, and you will not have to pay anything (assuming you take the right steps).

You have a number of options:

Option 1: Throw the ticket in the trash. The law says you do not need to reply to it, so don't. This option isn't as good as it sounds, because the ticket will work it's way through the system, you will get an order against you, and debt collection proceedings. You will end up with a big mess to unravel, which is possible to do, but I wouldn't recommend it. This option is for hard-core libertarians only.

Option 2: Demur. This is kind of like throwing it in the trash, except you actually go to court to tell them you are doing that, and get them to agree that you can throw it in the trash. I have done this twice. The disadvantage of demurring is that you must file a motion, probably multiple motions if you have evidence you want to use, and that means you have to do a lot of lawyerly stuff. It's work. There's lots of info you can google for on how to demur to a camera ticket. If you go that route, I can give you more info.

Option 3: Plead Not Guilty. Then, at trial, immediately move for the ticket to be dismissed because it is not a valid ticket. This works too, and it's less work than demurring, because you don't have any motions to file. There is a potential disadvantage to it, which is that a really sharp judge might rule that since you have entered a plea of Not Guilty, it's too late for you to argue that you don't need to reply to the ticket. But I think that's unlikely. The advantage of this option is that it is easy to do.

 

[freddaman05]

Much Thanks you for your advice. The ticket is from San Francisco and from what I've heard they're pretty hardcore on collecting on these tickets, regardless if they've made an error. I brought up the lateness of the ticket to the clerk and he said it doesn't matter (I think that was the canned response). I was given a court date for arraignment on Oct 28, so if I'm going to try to get it thrown out I have some work cut out for me. What if I choose to Not enter a plea and point out the error at arraignment? The drive to SF is almost 2 hours and we live on a fixed income way below poverty level (abt 10K year), so I can't afford an attorney. I've looked over demurring, and from the looks of it I would need to make several trips to SF. The proof that I have that it was sent late is the postage meter mark, which isn't on the 'Face' of the ticket.

 

[demurringdude]

First of all, ignore the clerk. He is wrong. Half of what they tell you in traffic court is wrong. The bailiff will probably tell you before the judge comes in that you can only plead guilty, not guilty, or no contest. Wrong. It amazes me that they force you to listen to legal advice from non-lawyers, but they do.

When you go to the arraignment, you are quite within your rights to not enter any plea at all. The Vehicle Code gives you that right. Or you can more specifically say you wish to demur.

If you say you demur, then by law the judge is supposed to hear your demurrer immediately. But being the scofflaws that they are, they won't hear it immediately. They will give you a date to come back for a hearing, because that suits them better, which is more important to them than following the law.

So you will have to go to court twice - once for the arraignment, and then again after probably 30 days for a hearing on your demurrer.

Filing your motion and serving it can all be done by mail.

Demurrer motions can be found all over the internet, or I can send you one. If you want to use the mailing envelope at your demurrer hearing, you should consider serving notice on the DA that you intend to that. I had another thread on this forum that outlines how to do that, and you should include the case that I mentioned so that the judge knows he needs to accept your evidence. If you don't do that, the judge might not admit the evidence (some judges think, incorrectly, that they are only allowed to look at the complaint itself, and nothing else, at a demurrer).

You are definitely in for a little bit of paper-shuffling and court-attending, but the fine is $500 so it's worth doing.

 

[freddaman05]

Are you referring to your post 'Demurring to a California red light camera ticket' where you used Serrano v. Priest, 5 Cal.3d 584, 591: to get the court to look up your vehicle registration? I have found evidence code 452 (h) "Facts and propositions that are not reasonably subject to dispute and are capable of immediate and accurate determination by resort to sources of reasonably indisputable accuracy," would this be the section to use to have the post meter mark considered? Your post states that your demurrer was denied so how did you establish / prove defective service? Yes, I would like to try demurring.

 

[demurringdude]

Are you referring to your post 'Demurring to a California red light camera ticket' where you used Serrano v. Priest, 5 Cal.3d 584, 591: to get the court to look up your vehicle registration? I have found evidence code 452 (h) "Facts and propositions that are not reasonably subject to dispute

Apologies for the slow reply. I was banned from the forum for a month.

Yes, exactly correct. You need to write up a motion that quotes that case, and claim that the postmark, and any other doc you want to use like your registration card, are official writings not reasonably subject to dispute. Send that to the court, with copies of the postmark, ahead of your hearing, and serve it on the DA (check the time limit on how much notice you must give). At your hearing, be sure to formally introduce them into evidence, don't just wave them around or talk about them or point to them.

 

[slammerharder]

red light camera's

I see great advice in here, but lets not forget the key factor here.
Red light camera tickets are a violation of your 6th Amendment.


if by some chance you have terrible karma and find your self in court in front of a judge. Ask the judge to recite the 6th Amendment then ask where is the police officer that witness this incident.


Most the time you can write a letter with the ticket explain that it is in violation to your 6th Amendment rights. Then you state in the letter that you want digital forensically seal media of the recordings with Camera Time Stamps and server Timestamp of the incident. I can tell you know that the timestamps are all off by 2 to 3 hours. This is a techincal flaw many do not know about it.

Mail the letter off certified mail

They will drop it.

 

[Zigner]

I see great advice in here, but lets not forget the key factor here.
Red light camera tickets are a violation of your 6th Amendment.


if by some chance you have terrible karma and find your self in court in front of a judge. Ask the judge to recite the 6th Amendment then ask where is the police officer that witness this incident.


Most the time you can write a letter with the ticket explain that it is in violation to your 6th Amendment rights. Then you state in the letter that you want digital forensically seal media of the recordings with Camera Time Stamps and server Timestamp of the incident. I can tell you know that the timestamps are all off by 2 to 3 hours. This is a techincal flaw many do not know about it.

Mail the letter off certified mail

They will drop it.

This thread is 10 months old...OP is long done with this matter.
And, your advice is rubbish anyway