What Do I Do when the Court Subpoenas the Officer

[Starving_Student]

My question involves a speeding ticket from the State of: Washington
I received a speeding ticket on March 25th 2010, and I have been going back and forth with the court about this issue. Needless to say it has been over 9 months since the incident and this issue has not been resolved, yet I am determined to stay the course. Here are links to the discovery:

Page 1:
http://www.mediafire.com/i/?bb5ivoat9ft5wod

Page 2:
http://www.mediafire.com/i/?uwk4dubww7abouo

Page 3:
http://www.mediafire.com/i/?z4314aw113dss29

So I attended court to contest a speeding ticket back in September 2010. The judge says my motions would result in a dismissal (a lot of my motions were in regards to lack of evidence based on omissions made on the officers affidavit), but I needed to show proof that I requested the discovery in writing for my motions to suppress evidence to succeed. The clerk had not sent me a copy of that written discovery request I had sent in March, and the judge told me to resend a written discovery request again to show I had made an effort to obtain all pertinent evidence regarding my case. He said that if I was able to procure this discovery request, my motions would be considered valid at that time and the infraction against me would be dropped. Here are the links for the second discovery request and the following motions:

Written discovery request:
http://www.mediafire.com/i/?dq6kybc7294d9m7

SMD certification (note how the SMD certification EXPIRES A DAY AFTER MY INFRACTION…looks suspicious):
http://www.mediafire.com/i/?0islf2zv2dyut7b

Motions 1:
http://www.mediafire.com/i/?3dds8pby0bkwx69

Motions 2:
http://www.mediafire.com/i/?l25qzh361xv7x8x

Motions 3:
http://www.mediafire.com/i/?31ylnqt7vqlavf7

Fast forward to November 2010 and I get a letter from the judge:
http://www.mediafire.com/?odico4qf4osginl

In his letter he goes back on his word in court, saying that he wanted written proof that I requested the discovery the FIRST time, and did not want a SECOND discovery request submission (again, contrary to what he said in court). To add to that, he subpoenas the officer for my new court date at the end of Janurary (which also happens to coincide with a midterm exam I have). Ouch.
So basically I’m at wit’s end. I feel my motions should have worked the first (it should have been obvious to the judge that there is no way to request a discovery unless it is through a written request, even if I didn’t have it to present to him), but alas there is no point in arguing about the past. And now that the officer has been subpoenaed , I really don’t know how to win this case. I am hoping that the 9 months of time have fogged his memory and that he will be honest if he doesn’t remember something.

-What should I do at this point?
-Is it worth it to continue with contesting this infraction with the officer there? What else can I say?
-Since I did not request the officer to be there, can I still get a deferral (this is my first ticket ever).
-Should I get an attorney at this point? I am a student so getting an attorney will be costly, but pales in the face of getting slammed by rising insurance.
-The judge has been kind enough to allow me to appear over the phone instead of traveling 250+miles out to Okanogan County. Should I accept this or would it be better to appear in court?
-Instead of the original judge, I am getting a Protem. Should this be something I should request changed to the original judge since he knows my situation?
-If I decide to proceed with this contested hearing, how do I cross-examine the officer to make the judge doubt his statements and tip the “preponderance of evidence” scale in my favor?
-Are my current motions (posted in the Motions links) still valid? Even in front of an officer?
-Most importantly in my opinion, the judge went back on his word when he said he would accept my motions if I could bring forth proof that I submitted a second discovery request. I have requested the courtroom transcript for that date to have evidence of what the judge said. Is this something I can hold against the judge in my favor and have my motions accepted based on his original statements, or will they just disregard everything since they can just ask the officer to respond to my motions?
Any help would be appreciated at this point. Thanks to colemac65, Speedy Gonzalez, BrendanjKeegan, blewis, and others for all your help.

Oh, and should I get this ticket dismissed, I will donate $300 (the same as the ticket amount) to an orphanage. I will post up the receipt as proof for all to see.

[colemac65]

did you waive your right to a speedy hearing?

[Starving_Student]

did you waive your right to a speedy hearing?

Nope, but I did request a continuance. Does that matter in regards to what you mentioned?

[Starving_Student]

Any thoughts guys? I know I'm in a bind, so I truly appreciate all your thoughts on this. Thanks in advance

[Starving_Student]

Come on guys, I know you can do it. Just a little more brainpower and we should be there....Any help?

[BrendanjKeegan]

Wow. What a mess!

Okay, are you certain, and ABSOLUTELY certain, that the judge said, "send the discovery request AGAIN?"

I would still go to the court and fight the infraction. After all the work that you put into it already, I would see it through. Plus, you have a Protem, so getting him/her to side with you is gonna be easier than the original judge. Explain your situation to him in court and he will already be sympathetic.

The phone would be a bad idea. There's something about arguing over the phone that just doesn't fly with me, but maybe would fly for you.

If it coincides with a mid-term then you need to decide if the midterm is really worth it. You can play the cost/benefit analysis game and decide which you would rather do. In my experience, profs are generally understanding about moving the date of a test, or at least doing a make-up. Just give the prof a heads up and organize an alternative in advance.

As for your original motions, they seem to look pretty good. I would go through with them, but they will no longer be pre-trial motions if the officer shows up.

If the witness (the officer) shows up, you will place yourself into a sticky situation. You need to be able to examine the merits of the case on the fly and be able to argue with it. A prosecutor will show up to examine the witness, so it's going to be a little bit harder. Just remember that the prosecutor can't make assumptions and can only act as a prosecutor, not a witness. If the protem starts to act as the prosecutor, then you can have some fun with the case.

If the case does go forward, then here's how I would, and a lot of attorneys would advise, to do it: Sit there and let the pros. examine the witness and then let them rest. Letting them rest is very important. Actually, make it look like you have no idea what you're doing beyond IRLJ 3.1. After the pros case has been made, go into motions. Things will have changed since the officer's statement, but there are a few things that you know need to be established in order to set foundation. Use that to your advantage. It's moving radar, so the prosecutor is bound to miss something.

If you want, send me a PM and we can chat on the phone or through e-mail. However, as for now, lunchtime is over.

[Starving_Student]

Wow. What a mess!

Okay, are you certain, and ABSOLUTELY certain, that the judge said, "send the discovery request AGAIN?"

I would still go to the court and fight the infraction. After all the work that you put into it already, I would see it through. Plus, you have a Protem, so getting him/her to side with you is gonna be easier than the original judge. Explain your situation to him in court and he will already be sympathetic.

The phone would be a bad idea. There's something about arguing over the phone that just doesn't fly with me, but maybe would fly for you.

If it coincides with a mid-term then you need to decide if the midterm is really worth it. You can play the cost/benefit analysis game and decide which you would rather do. In my experience, profs are generally understanding about moving the date of a test, or at least doing a make-up. Just give the prof a heads up and organize an alternative in advance.

As for your original motions, they seem to look pretty good. I would go through with them, but they will no longer be pre-trial motions if the officer shows up.

If the witness (the officer) shows up, you will place yourself into a sticky situation. You need to be able to examine the merits of the case on the fly and be able to argue with it. A prosecutor will show up to examine the witness, so it's going to be a little bit harder. Just remember that the prosecutor can't make assumptions and can only act as a prosecutor, not a witness. If the protem starts to act as the prosecutor, then you can have some fun with the case.

If the case does go forward, then here's how I would, and a lot of attorneys would advise, to do it: Sit there and let the pros. examine the witness and then let them rest. Letting them rest is very important. Actually, make it look like you have no idea what you're doing beyond IRLJ 3.1. After the pros case has been made, go into motions. Things will have changed since the officer's statement, but there are a few things that you know need to be established in order to set foundation. Use that to your advantage. It's moving radar, so the prosecutor is bound to miss something.

If you want, send me a PM and we can chat on the phone or through e-mail. However, as for now, lunchtime is over.

Thanks for your reply Brendan! So I got the court transcript, and the judge was right; he did request the ORIGINAL discovery request to be sent in. Fail on my part

As far as having the trial over the phone, I have no choice really. The courthouse is nearly 300 miles away, and my midterm is mandatory (I need it to finish this class for graduation!). I know it doesn't sound too appealing, but I'll give it my best shot