|
RED LIGHT
CAMERAS
|
|
www.highwayrobbery.net
|
|
Fight Your Ticket: Addenda If you haven't read the Links page section about Fight
Your Ticket, please be sure to do so. These
are my additional index entries for and comments about Nolo Press book Fight Your Ticket and Win in California,
by David W. Brown, 10th - 13th Editions only (I advise
you not to use an edition before the 13th). I
have arranged these materials by subject matter, with the subjects that
are the most useful, or on most people's minds, coming first.
Briefs
11/14 - 15 12th Edition - Briefs 230 - 236 13th Edition If
you have
consulted the 13th Edition's index and
cannot find what you're looking for, an alternative would be to go to
Amazon . com's page for FYT and use Amazon's feature
called "Search Inside This Book." Briefs
231 - 236
B:
Traffic School and Second Offender Traffic School
Traffic
school: In Chapter 9, at the end of "Infraction Option # 1," all
four editions (Eds. 10 - 13) say, "Note, however, that by pleading not
guilty you give up your right to attend traffic school and have the
charges dismissed." That's
misleading. It makes it sound like there's no
chance of getting traffic school once you've pled not guilty. I
agree that by pleading not guilty you do give up your automatic
right to attend traffic school - the granting of it becomes a matter of
the judge's discretion. But it's been my observation that most
judges will still grant it if you ask at the beginning of the trial
session - and many will grant it even after they've found you guilty.
2.
Traffic
school: In Chapter 9, at the end of "Infraction Option # 2," all
four editions (Eds. 10 - 13) say, "But
remember, once you've pleaded not guilty, you have forfeited your
opportunity to attend traffic school." That
is flat-out incorrect. See Comment # 1, above.
Traffic school: In
Chapter 9, at the end of "Infraction Option # 5," the 10th and 11th
editions say, "Warning:
If you decide to fight (by pleading not guilty), you usually forfeit
the option of having your case dismissed in exchange for attending
traffic school." "Usually" exaggerates the
risk. See Comment # 1, above. In the same location (end of
Option # 5), both editions say, "(See
Chapter 10, Section A2e.)" That should be "Section A3e."
Second
Offender traffic school: In Chapter 9, in
the middle of "Infraction Option # 5," all four editions (Eds. 10 -
13) say, "Note: Traffic school cannot
be chosen as an option more than once in an 18-month period." This is
incomplete information. All four editions fail to mention,
anywhere,
the availability of Second Offender traffic school. Chapter 10
(Section A3(e) or page 155 in the 12th & 13th Eds.), hints
at its existence, though:
"...to prevent people from using this option more than twice over a certain period." (Emphasis added.) But since Chapter 10 doesn't go on to mention Second Offender traffic school, a reader who has also read Chapter 9 will just end up wondering - "Can I only get traffic school once, or twice?"
The
net effect of the repeated warnings is that readers are discouraged
from fighting their tickets.
Traffic
school: In Chapter 14 (Section B3 or page 300 in the 12th Ed.,
302 in the 13th Ed.), all four
editions (Eds. 10 - 13) say, "You
might remind the judge that the law says a judge can't routinely apply
a policy against traffic school for those who go to trial and
lose. (People v.
Wozniak (1987) 197 Cal.App.3d Supp. 43)" This
is important information to have
if you are going to trial, and I do not understand why the Wozniak
decision is mentioned only one time in the whole book, and then only
"way in the back."
Fake
Tickets: Editions 10 - 12 fail to mention,
anywhere, the
existence of Fake/Snitch Tickets, but the 13th
Edition does, on page 255. "Even if you do list the true driver, the worst that will usually happen is that he or she will receive what some people call a 'snitch ticket,' without the court's address, which is only a bluff, to which, unfortunately, many people respond and pay fines." Actually,
if you do list the true driver, that person will receive a real
ticket, to which they must respond.
D:
Discovery and Evidence 1. Discovery,
who to serve: In
Chapter 10 Brown begins by instructing his readers to serve their
informal Discovery request on the DA.
I think the DA's office is a Black Hole for infraction litigants, and
that serving only the DA is a big mistake. Brown does
mention
also serving the city attorney, but gives it "second billing," where it
might be overlooked. See my advice about who to serve, on my Getting Records/Discovery page.
Discovery:
In Chapter 10 all four editions (10 -13) have a 9+ page motion form
entitled "Notice of motion for preclusion of testimony...." This
is the type of motion you would file if the city fails to provide the
Discovery you requested. I
have looked up all the case cites given in the motion, and many
citations bear typographical errors. Additionally, there are no
case cites newer than 1993, something that is likely to make a judge,
even one who is not a legal scholar, suspect that he is not being
presented with the latest and best law on the subject - even if indeed
it is the latest and best.
Discovery:
In Chapter 10 all four editions (Eds. 10 - 13) have a couple of motion
forms
where it says "plaintiff's motion" instead of "defendant's
motion." The forms are entitled:
FYT
mentions the Best
Evidence
Rule several times but does not discuss it at any length, and only the
12th Edition indexes it.
Defenses:
Neither the 11th Edition, which was published in 2005, nor the 12th
Edition, which was published in 2007, mentions Assembly Bill 1022 of
2003 (effective
Jan. 1, 2004) or the extensive changes it
made to VC 21455.5; nor did they discuss the potential avenues of
defense opened by those changes.
F:
Sample Briefs/Motions, and Tear-Out Forms
Some
of the sample Briefs/Motions show just the DA being served. I
recommend that unless you are 100% sure that it is the DA prosecuting
your case, you serve both the DA and
the city attorney. All
four editions contain tear-out copies of standard legal forms that are
now readily available on the Internet. To avoid having its
readers
try to use forms that may have become out-of-date, FYT should delete
the tear -out forms and simply instruct its readers to obtain the
forms on the 'Net.
--------------------------------- |