Speeding - trying to pull license

[robinmorehouse]

What is the name of your state? Iowa

My husband was pulled over for speeding on Feb. 20th and issued a ticket. He was on license probation until March 23rd, so he fought the ticket. He was finally CONVICTED on May 9th and notice was sent to the DOT on May 25th. Now they are trying to pull his license because they say he had a conviction while on probation, which he did not. We called the DOT and they said they go by violation date, not conviction date, but their own notice and Iowa law says it has to go by CONVICTION date. We plan to appeal the suspension, but does anyone have any other advice?

 

[seniorjudge]

What is the name of your state? Iowa

My husband was pulled over for speeding on Feb. 20th and issued a ticket. He was on license probation until March 23rd, so he fought the ticket. He was finally CONVICTED on May 9th and notice was sent to the DOT on May 25th. Now they are trying to pull his license because they say he had a conviction while on probation, which he did not. We called the DOT and they said they go by violation date, not conviction date, but their own notice and Iowa law says it has to go by CONVICTION date. We plan to appeal the suspension, but does anyone have any other advice?

We called the DOT and they said they go by violation date, not conviction date, but their own notice and Iowa law says it has to go by CONVICTION date.

What is the statute number on this law?

My own personal opinion is that he is out of luck; he committed the violation while on probation, regardless of when he gets convicted.

Think about...if it were the other way around, then everyone would stall, get continuances, change judges, etc., hoping to get past the period of probation.

 

[robinmorehouse]

Iowa Code

This is the code I found on on the Iowa General Assembly Website: 761-615.20(321). I searched license probation violation. The thing is though, he pleaded not guilty and was later found guilty. I thought the law everywhere in the United States said innocent until proven guilty. Then how can they go back to a day he was considered innocent of the charge. Even the noticed the DOT sent to us said said traffic conviction while on probation, yet he was not convicted for another 2 and a half months. He did not purposly stall he really did fight it. Our first trial was scheduled for April 18th, and then the state had to continue it because the state trooper who pulled him over could not be there until May 9th. We even asked when the last time the radar gun had been calibrated. He knows he was wrong for speeding but it should not count until he was convicted. That is like saying someone is definately a thief before he is convicted of it. You can't do that. Again innocent until proven guilty comes into hand. Thank you for your comment though.

 

[sukharev]

Nobody disputes that. However, probation is given so that you do not violate it. Violation happened when it happened, not at the trial. Tough luck, better get restricted license application ready.

 

[poppakeith]

What is the name of your state? Iowa

My husband was pulled over for speeding on Feb. 20th and issued a ticket. He was on license probation until March 23rd, so he fought the ticket. He was finally CONVICTED on May 9th and notice was sent to the DOT on May 25th. Now they are trying to pull his license because they say he had a conviction while on probation, which he did not. We called the DOT and they said they go by violation date, not conviction date, but their own notice and Iowa law says it has to go by CONVICTION date. We plan to appeal the suspension, but does anyone have any other advice?

Because common sense runs against your case, and hubby wants to get off on a technicality, you really do need a lawyer and his research and rhetorical resources. It is not impossible that, buried perhaps in the language and details of Iowa statutes, the course of a probation is sufficiently confused for a judge to fudge it all to the benefit to your husband's cause. Not likely you will accomplish that end on your own.

 

[seniorjudge]

This is the code I found on on the Iowa General Assembly Website: 761-615.20(321). I searched license probation violation. The thing is though, he pleaded not guilty and was later found guilty. I thought the law everywhere in the United States said innocent until proven guilty. Then how can they go back to a day he was considered innocent of the charge. Even the noticed the DOT sent to us said said traffic conviction while on probation, yet he was not convicted for another 2 and a half months. He did not purposly stall he really did fight it. Our first trial was scheduled for April 18th, and then the state had to continue it because the state trooper who pulled him over could not be there until May 9th. We even asked when the last time the radar gun had been calibrated. He knows he was wrong for speeding but it should not count until he was convicted. That is like saying someone is definately a thief before he is convicted of it. You can't do that. Again innocent until proven guilty comes into hand. Thank you for your comment though.

Guilty until proven otherwise is not applicable when you are on probation.


Even the noticed the DOT sent to us said said traffic conviction while on probation, yet he was not convicted for another 2 and a half months.

You're reading this wrong. He was convicted for a violation that happened while he was on probation; it doesn't matter when the conviction was, just when the violation was.

 

[robinmorehouse]

Seniorjudge, you have got to be kidding! If someone is on probation, and then commits another crime, they are automatically guilty until they are proven innocent. That is not how it works in the United States. And I am not reading it wrong. The law clearly states that the DOT has to go by the conviction date. Would you tell someone who stole something that they go to jail right then and there even before they had a trial just because that is when they committed the crime? I don't think so. They have to be convicted first. In our case we really thought my husband would be found not guilty. So then would the DOT still try to pull his license if he was found not guilty? The answer is no, we already asked them that. They told us they are pulling it because he was found guilty, but the conviction did not happen until the probation ended! The supervisor from the DOT we spoke to today even said she did not know why the notice was sent out because the conviction came later, but she could not change it. She advised us to appeal it before a judge and said we have a very good chance of winning. I came on here for advice, not for everyone to tell me tough luck and live with it and give bad information. The only person who looks like they know what they are talking about is poppakeith.

 

[The Occultist]

Is there an actual legal statute out there the explicityly states that one is innocent until proven guilty? I don't believe there is, and it's obviously not the case. Evidence of such includes arrests being made before a trial ever occurs, or being advised to not leave the state. If one were innocent, and thought to be so, why would limits be placed upon said individual? "Innocent until proven guilty" is just a nice way of saying that the burden of proof is on the DA.

When entering probation, your rights are definitely limited. The terms of probation are typically that where you are not allowed to commit any other crimes during the probation. I fail to see how the actual conviction date should change the fact that the crime was committed during the time you were still on probation. It simply does not make any sense that conviction date is what's important in this situation.

 

[robinmorehouse]

Respose

The conviction date matters because in Iowa a ticket does not count on your record until you pay it (plead guilty) or are convicted. It cannot appear on your driving record until one of those things happen. It is almost like it did not happen until then. In Iowa if you pull your own driving record, everything it shows will be conviction date, not violation date. And anyways, the law clearly states conviction not violation. As an example, In Iowa, if you get OWI 1st offense and that case is pending, then you get pulled over again for OWI, it would still count as a 1st offense, not 2nd, because the first case had not been settled yet. Otherwise if we go by some of your thinking it should be a 2nd offense because it was the 2nd time you were pulled over. But that is not the case. Maybe before responding with inaccurate information, some of you should read up on Iowa case law first.

 

[poppakeith]

Is there an actual legal statute out there the explicityly states that one is innocent until proven guilty?

It's a baisic, root-principle of western justice systems that under the law one is presumed innocent until pronounced guilty. Don't mean they are innocent of the charge, but just that the legal term, "guilty", don't apply for legal purposes until that magical instant.

 

[poppakeith]

The conviction date matters because in Iowa a ticket does not count on your record until you pay it (plead guilty) or are convicted. It cannot appear on your driving record until one of those things happen. It is almost like it did not happen until then. In Iowa if you pull your own driving record, everything it shows will be conviction date, not violation date. And anyways, the law clearly states conviction not violation. As an example, In Iowa, if you get OWI 1st offense and that case is pending, then you get pulled over again for OWI, it would still count as a 1st offense, not 2nd, because the first case had not been settled yet. Otherwise if we go by some of your thinking it should be a 2nd offense because it was the 2nd time you were pulled over. But that is not the case. Maybe before responding with inaccurate information, some of you should read up on Iowa case law first.

I'm thinking you are overly impressed with the possibilities and hope about a technical loop-hole in statutes, and not enough accepting of realities and the principles involved in this instance. Probation specifies acts particularly forbidden during a marked time period, and penalty for failure to adhere to the prohibitions. Being "on probation" is a special status. The timing of the act is what's of significance here, while the formality of legal acceptance/verification that the act was done (pronouncement of "guilty") during the period of prohibition is valid, whether that finding happens before or after expiration of the probation time. Like I said, if the loop-hole is there and has a chance of working for you, such will not be determined in this forum, absent a great deal of research in statutes and case law. You need a service more extensive than lawyers are inclined to do for free, just for the sake of debate, or just to prove you are operating of false hope. The comparisons you make, above, have insufficient bearing upon the case at hand, other than providing encouragement to the despirate.

 

[The Occultist]

The conviction date matters because in Iowa a ticket does not count on your record until you pay it (plead guilty) or are convicted. It cannot appear on your driving record until one of those things happen. It is almost like it did not happen until then. In Iowa if you pull your own driving record, everything it shows will be conviction date, not violation date. And anyways, the law clearly states conviction not violation. As an example, In Iowa, if you get OWI 1st offense and that case is pending, then you get pulled over again for OWI, it would still count as a 1st offense, not 2nd, because the first case had not been settled yet. Otherwise if we go by some of your thinking it should be a 2nd offense because it was the 2nd time you were pulled over. But that is not the case. Maybe before responding with inaccurate information, some of you should read up on Iowa case law first.

If you're so sure about it, then go fight it. Simple as that. You've heard what people on this board have to say. Your goal is not to convince us, because doing so will not magically make you win in court. Go appeal.