My question involves a speeding ticket from the State of: CA
My questions involve a speeding ticket from the State of: CA
22350 for 50+ in a pf 35, speed survey done in 08, still waiting for it to come in the mail from the county engineers.
I've been reading and trying to wrap my brain around the finer points of this for days now and I think I'm going in circles, so I'm gonna try to formulate half-intelligent questions.
1st Question has to do with whether to ask for the speed survey as part of discovery or not. The thinking being that if they know I'm asking for it, they will most certainly bring it to trial and enter it into evidence or submit it with their TBD response. If I don't request it beforehand, and they fail to produce it at trial, they have failed to meet the burden to prove it is not a speed trap (People v Halopoff, People V Earnest, & People v. Peterson, others) RIGHT? So is it highly UNLIKELY that the prosecution will NOT bring the speed survey even if it wasn't asked for in discovery? (Because otherwise, why wouldn't everyone just get off on this technicality, so it must not be that simple, right?)
I'm not trying to over think this, I just want to give the prosecution as many chances to screw up as possible!
Reading further, it looks like the correct thinking is to request it as part of discovery and hope the DA refuses to comply, leading to me filing a motion to compel, leading to the possibility of a motion to exclude the speed survey (for non-compliance), leading to a motion for dismissal. Is this what you recommend? (Seems like a very long shot.)
I think my chances of beating this on "speed limit not justified" are probably lousy (although I haven't seen the report yet). Even if I could prove speed limit should have been 5 higher, it would still result in points and hike my insurance because I was driving 15 over, so traffic school is better for me if I can't totally get out of it.
I'll ask for radar documentation, but all that line is useless if cop's notes indicate that he also visually estimated or paced (which I've read they usually testify to having used 2 methods of measuring your speed).
I don't want to just roll over and pay it, but when it comes down to it, unless they mess up on a technicality, I don't think I can successfully argue the weather, road width, etc. (30 questions defense) in court. Sounds like, from what I've read, when it's the cop's word against yours, the judge always sides with the cop. I'm thinking maybe I'd have a better chance with TBD simply on the basis that if I make a decent argument, and the officer did not speak to each element in the vehicle code, the officer wouldn't be losing face in front of the people in the gallery if the judge decided in my favor. I've also read (although don't know if it's true) that chances are higher of the cop not responding to the TBD than not showing up in court, since they apparently don't get paid extra for doing the TBD statement.
I'm not sure, however, how to deal with trying to make a motion to dismiss based on the prosecution not providing the speed survey since I won't know at time of writing my declaration whether they will provide the survey or not.
Since you can't mention traffic school in the TBD without admitting guilt, how do you go about requesting it after you're found guilty, or do you have to request a trial de novo to get it at that point? Do you only get a trial de novo if you are pleading not guilty? Can you change your plea after filing for the trial (but before the trial) and request traffic school?
Ok, if you're still reading, thank you! I really did do my homework before writing, but this is all highly technical for a lay person to follow.
Any feedback is greatly appreciated,