appealing a red light traffic violation legal error?

[I_Got_Banned]

What is an OP?

OP means "Original Poster"... And in this thread, that would be YOU.

So what does that mean?

It means that this statement:

By the way, the police officer committed a criminal offense by secretly writing on your ticket and not sending you a copy. See Vehicle code 40505.

Is INCORRECT! There is nothing in VC 40505 that describes or deems the officer's actions or lack thereof as a "criminal offense".

 

[potsnpea]

I believe so, yes. They certainly do not HAVE to check with the officer, but since the citation is the charging instrument, usually they notice the citing officer to amend the citation. Whether it is legally valid if simply changed by the court, I do not know. I know that DAs change arrest or requested charges all the time, whether the court can do this on a traffic cite I do not know ... I would think they can, but I do not have any spot on authoreity on that.


Of course, it might just as easily rendered the officer's motion irrelevant and could make THAT argument moot on its face.


The judge has to follow the law. Amending the citation on the fly at trial should not be allowed. However, if he was basing his decision on the fact that you had already been arraigned on the correct charge, the judge may not have made any error.


Maybe. I have no real experience with appeals. Others here do.

CdwJava a question for you since you are kind of like the devil's advocate here.

Given the fact that the officer most likely made the change on the ticket and the the fact that the Judge may not have realized this what is your opinion on this.

The judge assumed I was arraigned on the right charge but was the arraignment faulty?

If the judge at my arraignment knew that the change was made after I was given my citation would there have been some formal amendment that would have had to have taken place?

I am thinking that the courts had no idea that the change was made after I was given my citation. Even if it was a small error.

Anyways I was wondering if your thoughts had changed on this point given the new information?

 

[potsnpea]

I have been looking at the gazillion new steps I have to take in filing this appeal. I have to fill out all the paperwork in a certain fashion, I have to serve papers myself, and mail papers in a timely fashion. I have to know certain lingo and codes and the list goes on.

I certainly would hope a police officer would have to abide by similar rules.

This is really not worth the effort but I have come this far and I am stubborn and I feel like the ticket was unfair so I am proceeding forward. I can only chalk this up to learning something because the way the system is set up it doesn't really pay to defend yourself. You kind of just have to chalk it up to like being robbed.

 

[potsnpea]

OP means "Original Poster"... And in this thread, that would be YOU.


It means that this statement:



Is INCORRECT! There is nothing in VC 40505 that describes or deems the officer's actions or lack thereof as a "criminal offense".

Can you elaborate on this?

 

[potsnpea]

I am looking forward to seeing the result of this case

Despite all the help, I predict a negative outcome for the OP (for reasons I've already given).
Furthermore, I don't expect to hear the truth from the OP when the negative decision is handed down.

Enjoy

and why do you think this? Why wouldn't I tell the truth.

 

[Zigner]

and why do you think this? Why wouldn't I tell the truth.

I'm sorry - I'm just cynical based on previous posters. Nothing personal

 

[potsnpea]

Seems odd not to tell the truth. It's not like I have anything to hide here. I would think all who have followed this thread would be interested in the outcome. If it doesn't go my way I will have learned something about the system. It won't be a reflection of me either. If it goes negative it won't necessarily mean that I deserved it. It will just mean I got screwed.

I personally think the technicality here is not what makes me innocent but if that is what I have to do to shake this one off I will do what I got to do. The technicality seems a little off the original subject. But maybe it's not that far off the original subject. The original subject has to do with integrity and I think the officer's integrity was less than desired.

He testified he sat at a light watching it until it turned red and then he would turn his head and look to see if someone came through. I noticed this light had a huge tree blocking the light and the light on the left is not the light you customarily go by when going through lights. The light is on a bend in the road too. This officer knew people probably often ran a red light here or he wouldn't have testified he was watching for people who ran red lights specifically. This in itself tells me I might have had a reasonable case. I wasn't able to defend myself all that well because even though I do not know my law I could feel the tone was wrong in the court room. It was not fair. And now I know that an officer testifying shouldn't be making motions to make an amendment. He was acting like a prosacuter and I felt it in my gut that there wasn't a fairness.

I could go on and on but bottom line I have nothing to hide so I would only want to give you all some honest feedback especially since you all took time to entertain my questions.

I have not followed these boards so I don't know how a lot of other's are but I am surprised they feel the need to BS about the outcome. That is if you are basing my probable behavior on others who have gone before me.

I am glad it's not personal.

 

[potsnpea]

demurringdude,

On my appeal paper work they ask for me to summarize the testimony at my trial. Do I go into all that was said or do I just summarize the part about the officer asking to amend the violation code?

If I am having the transcript used do I need to summarize the whole testimony of myself and the officer?

It asks for a complete summary on the CR-143 form.

 

[potsnpea]

I Got Banned,




Is INCORRECT! There is nothing in VC 40505 that describes or deems the officer's actions or lack thereof as a "criminal offense".

Can you elaborate on this?

I am still curious why you think this is incorrect in capital letters no less.

 

[I_Got_Banned]

I am still curious why you think this is incorrect

Because: "There is nothing in VC 40505 that describes or deems the officer's actions or lack thereof as a 'criminal offense'".

 

[demurringdude]

The reason I asked if the officer was the prosecuter is because there is a section on the CR-143 appeal papers where they ask if the prosecuter made any motions.

I take it there was no prosecuter in my trail?

That's right, there was no prosecutor. I guess since there is a specific space for that, you could mention that the judge incorrectly allowed and granted a motion from the police officer.

 

[demurringdude]

Is INCORRECT! There is nothing in VC 40505 that describes or deems the officer's actions or lack thereof as a "criminal offense".

The police officer did precisely the thing prohibited by that code section. He set forth on any notice filed with a magistrate ... allegations which have not been delivered to the person receiving the notice to appear

I know it's a long sentence, but really, it's not that complicated.

 

[demurringdude]

do I just summarize the part about the officer asking to amend the violation code?

If I am having the transcript used do I need to summarize the whole testimony of myself and the officer?

Yes, I would give brief summary of everything, even though there is also a transcript. But when you get to the testimony and discussion about trees and visibility, be very, very brief. That section isn't going to get any attention from the appeal judges. Just mention that testimony was given about it, don't go into huge detail. It's only relevant in so far as pointing out that it was not testimony about violating 21463.

 

[potsnpea]

At the end of my trial after the judge had found me guilty of running a red light the officer asked the judge to take into consideration the severity of the violation. He asked the judge to take into consideration that the red light violation was in front of a high school and that I had a passenger in the car making it even more dangerous.

(Because there was a school there I was going only 25mph and school wasn't even open yet). The passenger in the vehicle was my 12 year old son who doesn't think I went through a red light either but I didn't bring into court because he is probably too young to be a witness. I would never endanger him by carelessly going through a red light.

All the more reason I wasn't driving recklessly in my mind.

I don't know why I always feel the need to justify or defend myself but my question is....

If the officer is there to give evidence and the judge doesn't ask him for any information is the officer acting once again like he is a prosecutor.

It just felt like he was trying to play a role in sentencing at that point. I got the full amount of the ticket, regardless of the fact that I hadn't had a ticket in over 20 years and regardless of the fact that I had some good argument that the tree obstructing the view of the light and that the light was unusual given the fact it was on a three way intersection on a bend. Many factors could have been taken into consideration. The judge didn't give me a break on any of it.
I wasn't argumentive either and I was quite polite. I know I probably should have been more argumentive but I was trying to be on my best behavior.
I don't think I was a very good attorney for myself.




which brings me to my other question.

If I asked the courts to consider my driving record was I making a motion?

And if the judge did not ultimately consider my driving record did he deny the motion.

There is a spot on the appeals form that asks if I made any motions. I submitted photographs which is one.

But does the driving record count as a motion?

 

[Zigner]

Your driving record is irrelevant.