22348 (b) speeding 100 + can i win california

[VeronicaLodge]

No, what he is saying is that it would be a different citation.

ah gotcha!

 

[colincrow]

Can someone verify that field calibrations are in fact a requirement and what section of the vehicle code requires it?[/QUOTE]

this is a very good question that i dont know the answer to. but if daily or field calibration is not required then y do officer have to fill out logs of that and file them ?

 

[colincrow]

well guys the case is tomorrow and i already fell defeated.

yet in the interest of justice and truth i will attend and deffend my self against the superior creditabilty and respect of authority.

and for the record i am innocent of the charges. i was driving at a speed of 88 mph and was cited for 112. and i dont know how or y

i let u guys know when i lose tomorrow

ty to the people who tryed to help

jim

 

[fairisfair]

So... what's your point? And how does it relate to helping the OP with his issue? Or is your intent just to spew rightous indignation by demonstrating how you are morally superior to all those who would come here to ask for help?

no, just to point out how ludicrous your examples are.

 

[colincrow]

This guy seems to have duplicate threads so I'll reply twice.

Just giving you a heads up. I'm not trying to scare you, only trying to make you think of what options you have. If you plead not guilty to a speeding ticket and lose in court you stand the chance that the judge will increase the fine(s) and penalties. I've sat in on traffic court (during 2 of my no-fault accident decisions) and seen it happen. If you attempt to discredit an officer and lose in court it can have drastic and negative affects on the judges decision against you. The judge could take away your driving privledges for a year or more if he/she wanted and increase the fine(s).

If you know, honestly, that you were going 100+ I would recommend pleading guilty and paying the, better chance, lesser fine and penalty and moving on. It looks much better in court when you accept your fault. You may even be able to ask for a lesser decision (exceeding the speed of 80+ for example) and then accept your fines(s) and penalties.

Just giving you a heads up with what you could be setting yourself up for. If you are honestly not guilty than go for it.

Keep us updated on the results.

this post is bs by the way the fine, and suspension can not be extended or highten.

the only thing he could do is hold me in contempt. and he wont do that because im trying to show that the officer is not credible.

 

[colincrow]

no, just to point out how ludicrous your examples are.

if there ludicrous it just to help u ill informed people understand.

 

[JIMinCA]

OK colin, Let's pull out the big guns:

First defense
This assumes there is no prosecuting attorney... which there likely will not be. Before the officer has the chance to say anything, tell the court you would like to make a couple points of order:
1. Since you do not see a prosecutor, you want to verify the prosecuting attorney has waived appearance. You want to recognize that it is not considered a deprivation of due process of law as per People v. Carlucci http://helpigotaticket.com/cases/carlucci.html
2. The court recognizes that the act of prosecution is an executive act as per Esteybar v. Municipal Court http://helpigotaticket.com/cases/esteybar.html
3. The court recognizes that the officer who has appeared is a witness, nothing more... nothing less as per People v. Marcroft http://helpigotaticket.com/cases/marcroft.html

Once you get concurrence on these items, you move for dismissal based on failure to prosecute. You cite VC 40803(b):

In any prosecution under this code of a charge involving the
speed of a vehicle, where enforcement involves the use of radar or
other electronic devices which measure the speed of moving objects,
the prosecution shall establish, as part of its prima facie case,
that the evidence or testimony presented is not based upon a
speedtrap as defined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section
40802.

You make the point that it is the burden of the prosecution to make the prima facie case that a speed trap did not exist. Since Your Honor is a member of the judiciary, he cannot perform and executive act of prosecution and certainly the officer cannot as he is niether a prosecutor nor is he even a licensed attorney. You should argue that you are not arguing a due process issue as in Carlucci, rather you are arguing a issue of statutory requirement.
If that fails, go to the

Second Defesne

When the officer testifies, he will have to provide the maintence/calibration records for his radar unit and he will have to provide a certificate of training for his 24 hour radar course as required in VC 40802:

A) When radar is used, the arresting officer has successfully
completed a radar operator course of not less than 24 hours on the
use of police traffic radar, and the course was approved and
certified by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training.
(D) The radar, laser, or other electronic device used to measure
the speed of the accused meets or exceeds the minimal operational
standards of the National Traffic Highway Safety Administration, and
has been calibrated within the three years prior to the date of the
alleged violation by an independent certified laser or radar repair
and testing or calibration facility.

If he doesn't present the documents...move for dismissal. If he does, inspect the documents and ensure they meet the requirements of VC40802. If they don't, move for dismissal. If they do, ensure that they are the original documents or a certified true copy. If they aren't, you object to the documents as being hearsay evidence and object to any of the officer's testimony based on the documents as being unsubstantiated... then, move for dismissal.
If that doesn't work, try the

Third Defense

Now you argue that the officer's log contradicts itself and argue that the officer could not have completed a daily field calibration of his radar as his log suggests.

Review the vehicle codes and print copies of them and of the court cases (one to give to the court and one for yourself).

Ok... good luck. Tell us how everything works out.

 

[VeronicaLodge]

if there ludicrous it just to help u ill informed people understand.

colin, if the people here are so ill informed, why are you here asking us, if you know so much, just go to court and handle it yourself.

 

[fairisfair]

colin, if the people here are so ill informed, why are you here asking us, if you know so much, just go to court and handle it yourself.

but take Jim with you.

 

[JIMinCA]

colin, if the people here are so ill informed, why are you here asking us, if you know so much, just go to court and handle it yourself.

I think Colin was correct... there are "ill informed" people here. They are the ones that came to this site mistakingly thinking that this is where you telll someone who is asking for help that there is no help and he should just suck it up and pay his fine. On the contrary, this is where people come looking for help and would like to get help rather than a lecture.

 

[JIMinCA]

but take Jim with you.

He would win if he did....

 

[colincrow]

First and foremost i would like to thank JIMinca for taking the time on all of his insightful and helpful information, in particular his last post. it is a strong play by play foundation for getting this case dismissed.

thank you

Next i would like to tell you all how my day in court went. I showed up on time to the department my case was assigned to. I would describe the room as court clerk waiting room, it consisted of about 40 seats faceing a bench in which the court clerks work behind. I stood in a short line of 2 people at that time and checked in with the court clerk. she then took files of my case in to a side room where the judge and trial would be held. she came back 5 minutes later and called me to the clerk bench and propositioned me that if i changed my plea to guilty that they would not suspend my license but the fine of 1821.00 $ and the 2 points on my record would still stand. I then said " so the officer is not her" ?. She said assertively and convincingly '' no he's here''. I declined her proposition and said " I want a trial ".

I later witnessed other occurrences of this where the clerk told the defendants, that if they changed there plea to guilty that they would get traffic school and that no points would go on their record. All but one accepted the plea change. In exchange they payed the fine and accepted traffic school. Probably out of anxiety and fear of defending themselves at trial. After a hour of waiting the clerk came up to me an told me, with a low voice, that they where saving my case to the end because the officer has to be some where else and that was good for me. It then became clear that they where stalling so that the officer would have ample time to show up if he wanted to. His station is only 2 miles from the court.

later I saw a motorcycle officer walking down the isle of the waiting room and straight in to the side court room. It was not the officer in my case. At this time there were only two cases left, mine and the other defendant who did not accept the plea agreemet. One minute after the officer walked into the court room the clerk called the other defendant in. Shortly after that, she came out in tears, clearly losing her case. About 10 mintues after the waiting room had emptied out and i was the only one left, the court clerk called me to the bench and told me my case had been DISMISSED. As I was filling out the bail return form, I said to the clerk "you know the reason the officer didn't show up is because he knew i was innocent''. In a shocked and device manor, she replied " no..no.. he's here**************.but in another deparment".

I think it should be said that no person of the court is looking out for your best interest. and has no other motive other than to get your guilty plea and money and have you on your way.

If you are innocent or think you have a chance of winning your case, "have not fear or anxiety of defending yourself for you will be no worse off then if you nelt down to the superior and intimidating ways of the judicial system ".

As for the results of my case i am happy. but still would of liked to have my day in court

 

[fairisfair]

He would win if he did....

and since you are retired why have you NOT offered to go then???

 

[fairisfair]

First and foremost i would like to thank JIMinca for taking the time on all of his insightful and helpful information, in particular his last post. it is a strong play by play foundation for getting this case dismissed.

thank you

Next i would like to tell you all how my day in court went. I showed up on time to the department my case was assigned to. I would describe the room as court clerk waiting room, it consisted of about 40 seats faceing a bench in which the court clerks work behind. I stood in a short line of 2 people at that time and checked in with the court clerk. she then took files of my case in to a side room where the judge and trial would be held. she came back 5 minutes later and called me to the clerk bench and propositioned me that if i changed my plea to guilty that they would not suspend my license but the fine of 1821.00 $ and the 2 points on my record would still stand. I then said " so the officer is not her" ?. She said assertively and convincingly '' no he's here''. I declined her proposition and said " I want a trial ".

I later witnessed other occurrences of this where the clerk told the defendants, that if they changed there plea to guilty that they would get traffic school and that no points would go on their record. All but one accepted the plea change. In exchange they payed the fine and accepted traffic school. Probably out of anxiety and fear of defending themselves at trial. After a hour of waiting the clerk came up to me an told me, with a low voice, that they where saving my case to the end because the officer has to be some where else and that was good for me. It then became clear that they where stalling so that the officer would have ample time to show up if he wanted to. His station is only 2 miles from the court.

later I saw a motorcycle officer walking down the isle of the waiting room and straight in to the side court room. It was not the officer in my case. At this time there were only two cases left, mine and the other defendant who did not accept the plea agreemet. One minute after the officer walked into the court room the clerk called the other defendant in. Shortly after that, she came out in tears, clearly losing her case. About 10 mintues after the waiting room had emptied out and i was the only one left, the court clerk called me to the bench and told me my case had been DISMISSED. As I was filling out the bail return form, I said to the clerk "you know the reason the officer didn't show up is because he knew i was innocent''. In a shocked and device manor, she replied " no..no.. he's here**************.but in another deparment".

I think it should be said that no person of the court is looking out for your best interest. and has no other motive other than to get your guilty plea and money and have you on your way.

If you are innocent or think you have a chance of winning your case, "have not fear or anxiety of defending yourself for you will be no worse off then if you nelt down to the superior and intimidating ways of the judicial system ".

As for the results of my case i am happy. but still would of liked to have my day in court

congratulations, yep, Jim will count that as a win too.

A dismissal on a case where you CLEARLY by your own admission should have been convicted of at least a lessor crime. Simply because the officer was busy else where with some other criminal.

Way to go.

 

[colincrow]

He would win if he did....

I agree that if i had jim defending me at my trial he would win.