stylett9

iTrader: (9)

A friend of mine got her 2nd ticket today within the 18 month period. I was under the impression you can only go to traffic school once every 18 months.

According to the CHP officer that gave her the ticket, you can go twice within 18 months, but the 2nd time it's a 12 hour class and your insurance won't be affected. I was totally unaware of this. Can anyone confirm?

2nd, I thought your speed doesn't matter as long as your not exceeding 100 MPH(excessive speeding ticket, no traffic school, constitutes wreckless driving and you get a felony) But i heard today that if you are doing over 80, different rules and laws apply. If this is true, what is the differance between speeding above and below 80MPH?

Reason i ask is because i'm going to tell her to go to court if it makes a differance. She honestly didn't know how fast she was going but she was sure that she was pacing with the rest of traffic. When she got pulled over she said she estimated she was doing 70. The cop said 76 and gave her the ticket and left. When she was telling me the story and mentioned he was on a bike first thing i thought was, how does he know your exact speed? If he was on a bike he couldn't have hit you with his laser. The best he can do is notate on the ticket how fast he estimated you were going. I looked at her ticket and i was correct. On the ticket he put estimated 81MPH.(remember that he told her 76)

some answer/help to what you guys think she should do would be much help. She's not trying to get out of the ticket, but she does atleast want to know if she can or can't go to traffic school.

thanks!

led

iTrader: (6)

Yeah, she can do the traffic school thing. I am a little fuzzy but I think that it wont affect her insurance.

I wish I could help you with the second part but I am a little fuzzy about that one also. What I do know is that in court, the officer's word will beat her word regarding her speed. My uncle is a CHP and he told me that when it is an officer's word against a driver, the judge usually sides with the officer.

onedirtyz

iTrader: (3)

she should take it to court. more people need to fight their tickets........SO many people could get off of their tickets if they bothered to go to court or do a trial by declaration.

you can only go to regular 8hr traffic school once every 18 months in california. if she wants to just give in and pay the ticket, she should go to court and ask the judge for 'second offense' traffic school, which is 12 hrs. [though i still think she should fight it, first]
if she plays her cards right the judge might be nice and give her the second offense traffic school.

918 Z

iTrader: (11)

the new chp bikes are mounted with laser front and rear so he could hit her. take a look at the BMW bike. as i remember, its 35mph over the posted speed limit would be considered reckless.

InZpire

iTrader: (5)

I dont mean to cut in but..

Is there a way to follow up the results of your trial by declaration? Or do you just have to go to court? thanks!

Fooshe

iTrader: (42)

1st of all, check with her insurance agent on how it would effect her policy. The insurance law in CA does not require the insurance company to waive the ticket if it shows up on her record. Even if it is the 12 hr. type and is shown on her record as "dismissed under 1801.1..." As long as they can see it, they can count it.

The officer is mistaken in making that blanket statement. Also, the granting of the 12 hr. traffic school thing is a money maker for the state and schools. Again, check with her insurance agent or carrier on their specific rule.

As far as the speed issue, officer discression is how reckless is determined. Most officers look at location, conditions and actual driving as well as speed. LASD protocall shows 25 mph over the limit qualifies you. Not sure about CHP's. Most street guys use much more though.

For traffic school, the court used to use 20 mph over as the limit...they realized they were missing the boat on income from traffic school fees. So now it is up the judge.

Suggestion, pay the fine and ask for a court date. If the officer shows up, the court usually gives everyone a chance to take traffic school before they begin (if you see the officer has showed up, this is a good idea). Just opt for that if it won't effect your ins.

Good Luck!

onedirtyz

iTrader: (3)

once you send in your TbD all you have to do is wait. the court will get your paperwork, the cop's paperwork, and will make a decision. they will inform you of their decision via snail mail. if you are found not guilty, or the case is dismissed for whatever reason [cop didn't fill out his paperwork, etc] you will be refunded your bail money and you're all done. if you are found guilty, by law you are allowed a trial de novo.......basically a 'new trial' where you get a new judge and a new ruling.
http://www.helpigotaticket.com/declar/index.html
go read.

CVC 40902:
Trial by Written Declaration

40902. (a) (1) The court , pursuant to this section, shall, by rule, provide that the defendant may elect to have a trial by written declaration upon any alleged infraction, as charged by the citing officer, involving a violation of this code or any local ordinance adopted pursuant to this code, other than an infraction cited pursuant to Article 2 (commencing with Section 23152) of Chapter 12 of Division 11.
(2) The Judicial Council may adopt rules and forms governing trials by declaration in accordance with this section. Any rule or form adopted by the Judicial Council pursuant to this paragraph shall supersede any local rule of a court adopted pursuant to paragraph (1).
(b) If the defendant elects to have a trial by written declaration, the defendant shall, at the time of submitting that declaration, submit bail in the amount established in the uniform traffic penalty schedule pursuant to Section 40310. If the defendant is found not guilty or if the charges are otherwise dismissed, the amount of the bail shall be promptly refunded to the defendant.
(c) Notwithstanding Division 10 (commencing with Section 1200) of the Evidence Code, the rules governing trials by written declaration may provide for testimony and other relevant evidence to be introduced in the form of a notice to appear issued pursuant to Section 40500, a business record or receipt, a sworn declaration of the arresting officer, or a written statement or letter signed by the defendant.
(d) If the defendant is dissatisfied with a decision of the court in a proceeding pursuant to this section, the defendant shall be granted a trial de novo.

Amended Ch. 488, Stats. 1993. Effective January 1, 1994.
Amended Sec. 1, Ch. 265, Stats. 1998. Effective January 1, 1999.
http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d17/vc40902.htm




i'm sending in my trial by declaration today......wish me luck

Fooshe

iTrader: (42)

I wish you all the luck in the world, but remember #2. The local court rules(ings) superceed this section. More simply put, if the court says "sorry, you were convicted....tough luck." I would call the court clerk and ask to be transfered to the traffic div. When speaking with the court secretary, verify if that court has any rules that differ or are in place of section 40902 cvc regarding trials by declaration; specifically, trial de novo requests. This could be a loop-hole for you later.

Also, the officer not filling out his form is somewhat common in busy area's, like LAPD'S 77th div. But smaller PD officers are not that pressed for time and actually get to take time in the station to fill the paperwork out. I know of one dept. that grants the officers 1 hour over-time pay to fill them out because the city revenue is effected. So make sure you're arguement has substance and not just "I wasn't speeding" where your justification for dismissal goes.

You need to show reasonable doubt as to the validity of the charge....eg. there was a van in the next lane next to me and he was going faster than I was. I believe the radar gun picked him up instead of me. I got pulled over because (enter your reason here...sports car, color of car, racial profiling, etc.) Then comment on the officer's demeanor if he wouldn't hear your reason for not deserving the ticket.

If she was speeding, and does not qualify for traffic school, I say enter a no contest plee, pay the fine and slow down. I am not here to say "fight the man" just for the sake of fighting. Own up to your violation and deal with the consequenses. The officer is doing his job and we (society) just don't like it. We have no really good reason for it except we don't want to take responsibility; either morally or financially. I just say don't bash or lie about the officer if he was doing his job correctly and courteously. Again, you don't have to like his job, but you do have to respect his authority if he conducts himself with intergrity and respect.

InZpire

iTrader: (5)

Oh cool!

Thing is, I was told that my paper was suppose to be read last May 22 and wait for results in the mail 2 weeks after. It's past 4 weeks already. :/ I was thinking of paying the court clerks a visit to check on it.


Good luck Fooshe!

I got a lil help from the Ticket Assasin then modified it a bit to add more proof. Hope it went well. :/

stylett9

iTrader: (9)

not really sure what your point is, but in post i mentioned she isn't trying to get out of the ticket. She just wants to know if she really is eligible for traffic school and if her speeding over 80MPH(according to the ticket) effects her situation in anyway. Anyhow, thanks for all the input guys.

onedirtyz

iTrader: (3)

i really might be reading the legal jargon incorrectly, but i thought that

"(2) The Judicial Council may adopt rules and forms governing trials by declaration in accordance with this section. Any rule or form adopted by the Judicial Council pursuant to this paragraph shall supersede any local rule of a court adopted pursuant to paragraph (1)."

actually means that THIS CODE supercedes and LOCAL COURT's ruling. by STATE LAW the citizen has a legal right to a trial de novo. a small local court cannot overthrow state law especially when the code is written as such.

Fooshe

iTrader: (42)

You are 100% correct. I think I did not make my point that clear. I was trying to illustrate that the court may have it's own rules and think that you're dumb enought not to know your actual rights. Knowing the courts's rules ahead of time allows you to interject things like..."In conclusion, I feel that the points outlined above not only show reasonable doubt, they actually show a clear proponderance of the evidence that would make filing a trial de novo almost comical..."

You are not only reinforcing your belief in your statements, you almost putting words in the courts mouth. While at the same time telling them that you know the system and will just try, try again. They will sometimes look at your arguement and if it sounds good enough, they will just dismiss the cite. You see, judges like to keep their courtroom dark. Leaves more time for golf and more interesting things like them doing their job.

Stylett9, My earlier point was that if she is guilty, she should do what she can within the law to get it dismissed. However, don't look at this as a quest or a chance to smear an officer or lie just becuase she has right footitis. It is a lesson in taking responsibility for your actions. I know that's not a popular thing to do, but it is still the right thing to do.

Fooshe

iTrader: (42)

Remember, any delay is fine. The insurance industry looks at the citation date, not the conviction date. Hell, let them take a year to resolve it. That's one year you don't have to pay for it in higher insurance rates.