TbWD and Traffic School

[dfminc]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? California
I would like to contest a ticket I recently received through Trial by Written Declaration. If I my case is not dismissed I would request Trial de Novo and then traffic school but by the time the Trial de Novo comes around I will be in school several hundred miles away(you have to appear in person). Is TbWD feasible?

[Hey There]

dfminc When filing a Trial by Written Declaration
a cited driver is best prepared if he can obtain a copy of the front and back of his ticket, a copy of the video if one was made, and other information that the officer plans to use in court.
This is referred to as Informal Discovery.
1. The cited driver fills out a one page form
Forms and information on how to file are available through the website Help! I Got A Ticket! and
A book published by NOLO on contesting traffic tickets
The Judicial Council doesn't have a form for this.
2. The driver has a friend mail copies, certified, return receipt to the D.A. and to the citing officer .(The form on the website can be modified to send a request for Discovery to the citing officer.)
*******************************************************
If the judge rules against the cited driver, the driver can request a new trial with a different judge(2 seperate forms) if done within 20 days. He can also request a later trial date.
Information on how to contest a traffic ticket in CA. can be found on the above website and in the book likely available at a library.
Typing key words on Google will bring up websites which give information on contesting a traffic ticket.
Ex:contesting a traffic ticket in CA.
A lawyer to appear in court for you may also be a viable option depending on the fee.
The VC you were cited for?

Best Regards,
Hey There

[occharge]

Typically, once you take the TBD route most judges will not allow/offer you the option of traffic school.
There's an even lesser chance of you receiving that option after a Trial De Novo.
Just like most people consider "driving" as a "privilege/not a right", most Judges consider Traffic School as a privilege as well.
Keep in mind that nothing in the California Vehicle Code that prohibits a driver from opting for Traffic School after a "Not Guilty" plea, however, the California Rules of Court leaves it up to the judge's discretion.

[JIMinCA]

Case law also requires that a judge give the same consideration for traffic school before or after a trial and conviction. To not award traffic school due to the fact that the Defendant had a TBWD or a regular trial and was found guilty is an appealable issue.

[occharge]

Originally Posted by JIMinCA

Case law also requires that a judge give the same consideration for traffic school before or after a trial and conviction. To not award traffic school due to the fact that the Defendant had a TBWD or a regular trial and was found guilty is an appealable issue.

Jim,

I agree and I’ll even offer the citations on your behalf…

In People v. Wozniak, 197 Cal. App. 3d Supp. 43 as well as in People v. Enochs, 62 Cal. App. 3d Supp. 42 the Courts decisions to deny both defendants the right to Traffic School were overturned on appeal.

That is also confirmed by CVC section 42005 which states in part:

In lieu of adjudicating a traffic offense, and with the consent of the defendant, or after conviction of a traffic offense, the court may order any person issued a notice to appear for a traffic violation to attend a traffic violator school . . .

and by California Rule of Court #4.104(c).3 which states:

A defendant who is otherwise eligible for traffic violator school is not made ineligible by entering a plea other than guilty or by exercising his or her right to trial. A traffic violator school request must be considered based on the individual circumstances of the specific case

However, that same subsection Of the California Rules of Court concludes with:

The court is not required to state on the record a reason for granting or denying a traffic violator school request.

That’s where my I disagree with you part comes from… That is what my last post is based upon.

Judges today typically will deny the request to traffic school without making an on the record statement as to why. Even if pressed to do so, a simple“based on the merits of this case the court denies your request” will suffice.

The appellate court case that supports that is: People v. Schindler, 20 Cal. App. 4th 431.

In that case, the Muni Court had denied the defendant his right to Traffic School after he was convicted of VC section 22349 (76mph in 55mph). The defendant appealed. After review and in its opinion, the Court of Appeals went on to say:

we conclude that after convicting a defendant of a traffic infraction the trial court is not required to state its reasons for denying the defendant's request for traffic school. We affirm the judgment of the municipal court.

[dfminc]

Thank you for your help everyone.