Ticket for back seat passenger (without license) for seat belt violationin CA

[prik]

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

Hello,
I have received a citation in CA for seat belt violation. I was a visitor to California, hence I didn't know that seat belt for back seat passenger is mandatory in CA, Secondly, I do not have a drivers license. I recently came to know about the trial by declaration, for which I was asked to send a letter to re-open my case. Can anyone suggest me on this?? Should I mention not guilty or guilty in the trial by declaration? This is my first ticket, without even having a drivers license. In order to re-open the case, do I need to mention the details or just request for TBD?? Thanks in advance.

[CdwJava]

You want to "re-open" the case?

Have you already plead guilty or been found guilty at trial?

- Carl

[prik]

Originally Posted by CdwJava

You want to "re-open" the case?

Have you already plead guilty or been found guilty at trial?

- Carl

I paid the amount (online) earlier without opting for the trial by declaration. Recently, I came to know that through the trial by declaration I could make an appeal to the court through letter (fight my ticket). when I made a call to the court to ask if I could apply for trial by declaration after paying the ticket (and after the due date), they said that I could re-open the case by sending a letter.
(As it was my first ticket, I was in a hurry to pay that and did not bother to check other options.)
Thank you for your response.

[CdwJava]

Ah ... well, if that's what the court clerk told you, then listen to what they have to say. But, you usually have a very narrow window within which to file for a TBD so do what you need to do quickly.

- Carl

[CourtClerk]

I answered this very same question from you when you posted it on the other site.

You can reopen the case within 30 days of paying the ticket.

[Jim_bo]

CC,

That's something I did not know. Is that a statute or a rule of court? Do you have a reference?

[I_Got_Banned]

Originally Posted by CourtClerk

I answered this very same question from you when you posted it on the other site.

You can reopen the case within 30 days of paying the ticket.

By "Re-open the case" or do you mean "withdraw his plea"?

Originally Posted by prik

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CALIFORNIA
Hello,
I have received a citation in CA for seat belt violation. I was a visitor to California, hence I didn't know that seat belt for back seat passenger is mandatory in CA, Secondly, I do not have a drivers license.

What I am wondering is this... Using the "I didn't know that seat belt for back seat passenger is mandatory in California" is highly unlikely to get you a "not Guilty" verdict or a dismissal of the citation. So what other defense/strategy will you be declaring on your TBD form?

Originally Posted by prik

Should I mention not guilty or guilty in the trial by declaration?

What would be the point of re-opening the case, completing the TBD forms, filing them in court... etc if you're gonna simply plead "Guilty"? You've already done that, paid your fine and are done with it...

The only reason you would go the TBD route is if you're gonna plead "Not Guilty". But before you do that you really need to think of a reason as to why the court should rule in favor of your "Not Guilty" plea.

Originally Posted by prik

This is my first ticket, without even having a drivers license.

Congratulations prik!

I'm just kidding you...

Originally Posted by prik

In order to re-open the case, do I need to mention the details or just request for TBD?? Thanks in advance.

You will have to mention the details to the Clerk when you go in to request the change. but i highly doubt that you have to mention that you previously plead Guilty and paid the fine when you complete the TBD forms.

[CourtClerk]

Originally Posted by I_Got_Banned

By "Re-open the case" or do you mean "withdraw his plea"?

It's a motion to set aside the bail forfeiture.... basically, reopen the case.

What I am wondering is this... Using the "I didn't know that seat belt for back seat passenger is mandatory in California" is highly unlikely to get you a "not Guilty" verdict or a dismissal of the citation. So what other defense/strategy will you be declaring on your TBD form?

Never said the OP was gonna win. Ignorance of the law, as we all know, is not an excuse.

What would be the point of re-opening the case, completing the TBD forms, filing them in court... etc if you're gonna simply plead "Guilty"? You've already done that, paid your fine and are done with it...

Not to mention, a seatbelt ticket has no points. There really is no point in it.

The only reason you would go the TBD route is if you're gonna plead "Not Guilty". But before you do that you really need to think of a reason as to why the court should rule in favor of your "Not Guilty" plea.

Not only a reason.... but a good reason...

You will have to mention the details to the Clerk when you go in to request the change. but i highly doubt that you have to mention that you previously plead Guilty and paid the fine when you complete the TBD forms.

Actually, they only need to go and say they want to reopen the case and plead not guilty. No one (especially the traffic window clerks) care why they want to. Not their job to care.

[I_Got_Banned]

Originally Posted by CourtClerk

Never said the OP was gonna win. Ignorance of the law, as we all know, is not an excuse.

Actually it is an excuse and one that is used frequently (especiallly on here)... Just not a good one!

Originally Posted by CourtClerk

Not to mention, a seatbelt ticket has no points. There really is no point in it.

And even if it had points, there is no driver's license number to attach the points to!

Originally Posted by CourtClerk

Actually, they only need to go and say they want to reopen the case and plead not guilty. No one (especially the traffic window clerks) care why they want to. Not their job to care.

I thought "giving legal advice" wasn't their job... but I guess "not caring" could be it too... Basically leaves the part about them "taking people's money"... And you'll never convince me that one isn't their job!!!

[CourtClerk]

Originally Posted by I_Got_Banned

Actually it is an excuse and one that is used frequently (especiallly on here)... Just not a good one!

Check

And even if it had points, there is no driver's license number to attach the points to!

Kinda, sorta, but not really. If the CA DMV can't find a driver license to attach the points to, they create what is called an X number. Think fictitious driver license that has all the rest of your identifying information. It in essence, until you apply for a CADL becomes your driver license. It gives them a way to suspend driving privleges (or apply points) and notify other states of outstanding tickets (or point violations). Works like a charm....

I thought "giving legal advice" wasn't their job... but I guess "not caring" could be it too... Basically leaves the part about them "taking people's money"... And you'll never convince me that one isn't their job!!!

Check mate

Taking their money IS their job....LOL (without caring that they are taking their money)

[I_Got_Banned]

Originally Posted by CourtClerk

Taking their money IS their job....LOL (without caring that they are taking their money)

Whoa, whoa whoa... Wait just one minute... Taking money <--> without caring!
Now you're Multi-tasking... So let me guess, you want that time paid as overtime, right?

And what are you LOLing for? Taking people's money while not caring???
Sorta explains why you're behind bullet proof glass, don't it!

I'm just joking with you.

[CourtClerk]

Originally Posted by I_Got_Banned

Whoa, whoa whoa... Wait just one minute... Taking money <--> without caring!
Now you're Multi-tasking... So let me guess, you want that time paid as overtime, right?

That would be nice....

And what are you LOLing for? Taking people's money while not caring???
Sorta explains why you're behind bullet proof glass, don't it!

Unfortunately for me, I'm not behind the bullet proof glass, I sit next to the judge in the courtroom. I have something better than bullet proof glass. I have a Sheriff's deputy in my courtroom that is ARMED.

However, when I first started with the courts (in traffic no less), I spent a couple of years taking people's money and not caring about it one bit. After all, I had had my money taken from me. I used to tell them... hey, it's not me taking it. I don't get a commission for taking your money. Pay it or not. Not my problem. There used to be people who got mad and would say "oh, yeah!!!! I'm not going to pay it!" How is that supposed to effect me that YOU won't pay YOUR ticket and YOUR license is going to be suspended????

[Jim_bo]

CC, you never answered my question. Is this practice as per statute, rule of court or just common practice?


IGB,

Originally Posted by I_Got_Banned

Congratulations prik!

I'm just kidding you...

I'm not sure that is very funny.

[CourtClerk]

Originally Posted by Jim_bo

CC, you never answered my question. Is this practice as per statute, rule of court or just common practice?

Sorry, didn't see it. I believe it's per statute.

Court Clerks cannot give "legal" advice, neither can Judges. Court Clerks are not licensed to practice law, Judges cannot be in the state bar while sitting as a judge. To give actual legal advice you need to be admitted into the state bar. However in California to take the bar exam most jobs like court clerks are excempt in most states including California from needing a law degree to take the bar exam.

A Court Clerk can only tell you how to take care of a ticket based on court rules. Not how to bend and manipulate those rules and regulations.

I would look at the vehicle code in California. See if like some state's rear seat belts are excempt. Sometimes certain vehicle's are excempt from needing seatbelts. My collector car was not made with seatbelts and no safe means to instal them in this car (English ash wood body frame and floor is also wood panels). So in this car I'm excempted from seat belt laws, as my car meets federal safety standard laws at the time of manufacture. If an older car made before seat belts became manditory. Lots of cars had no rear belts. Id also check and see if the driver is responsible to have passenger's to wear belts. Only way I could see challengeing this ticket.

If me, would not bother with court clerks, about as useful as police in their heavily biased towards the state winning their civil case against you. I would have tore the ticket up the second I was out of view of the police officer who wrote this useless ticket as applied to you. I have a driver's license, makes it easier to accuse that at one time a cop wrote me a ticket. When tickets like this are at their discretion to write or not!

A "trial" if no excemption and operator (driver) is responsible in the law. Would be useless. Cause what are you going to say. I was riding in the backseat and the police officer noticed I was not wearing my seat belt. I agreed because I've already paid the fine, etcetera. Court review is at the discretion of the court. Doubtfull they would review in your case and give you a hearing. Your out $92******************************************.....

I toss tickets because if my excuse doesn't work with a cop who discover's my ignoring the "court" via my driver's license. Think it would be fun to fight something like this in court****************************.... No driver's license how does the court identify you as the person who received that ticket? Even with a driver's license, knowing the system makes it near impossible to arrest you and even if they do. If you know the system you can really mess with them************************************************************************************.... Chances of a court issuing a warrent for you was near zero.

$92 was a small price to pay in learning traffic citation "justice" is not fair and impartial!