Using Discovery Response to Formulate Defenses

[c is for cookie]

My question involves a traffic ticket from the state of: CA

I was pulled over by Torrance PD for going 50mph in a 35mph zone driving northbound on Hawthorne Blvd. I extended then contested the ticket via TBWD but was found guilty. For my Trial de Novo, I submitted a Request for Discovery but didn't receive anything up until my court date. Upon arriving at court, the judge handed me a packet with all the documents I requested in discovery. Since I hadn't had a chance to review them to form a proper defense, I requested a continuance which was granted. I'm due back in court next week (Thursday). I can't find my original TBWD but if I do, I'll post it up. In the meantime, I've posted all the documents given to me for my discovery request below. Any holes in the cop's paperwork? Any additional documents I should try to get prior to my trial? I'm eligible for traffic school but I have another ticket pending so if I could get this one dismissed that would be best. Any help would be GREATLY appreciated. THANKS!

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B3G...VDhqYWh4bUtTZw

[That Guy]

My question involves a traffic ticket from the state of: CA

I was pulled over by Torrance PD for going 50mph in a 35mph zone driving northbound on Hawthorne Blvd. I extended then contested the ticket via TBWD but was found guilty. For my Trial de Novo, I submitted a Request for Discovery but didn't receive anything up until my court date. Upon arriving at court, the judge handed me a packet with all the documents I requested in discovery. Since I hadn't had a chance to review them to form a proper defense, I requested a continuance which was granted. I'm due back in court next week (Thursday). I can't find my original TBWD but if I do, I'll post it up. In the meantime, I've posted all the documents given to me for my discovery request below. Any holes in the cop's paperwork? Any additional documents I should try to get prior to my trial? I'm eligible for traffic school but I have another ticket pending so if I could get this one dismissed that would be best. Any help would be GREATLY appreciated. THANKS!

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B3G...VDhqYWh4bUtTZw

You need to redact your name, address and citation number off of ALL of those documents!

ETA: Seriously??? You should also redact your Date of Birth, Mailing Address, Citation number... ANY AND ALL PERSONAL IDENTIFYING INFORMATION!!!

But talk about providing what you asked for... Aside from a general reference to "any documentary evidence to be introduced at trial" (under #12 in your request), I don't see any specific request for the Engineering and Traffic Survey for the segment of roadway where you were cited. You can obviously submit a follow up request for that but I don't anticipate you getting it before next Thursday... You may be able to request one from Torrance Public Works Dept but I am not familiar with their procedures or how long it will take them to provide a copy... And without the survey, it will be difficult to ascertain which other documents are required pursuant to VC 40802 and as part of the prosecutions case in chief, or which should be admitted into evidence simply to lay the proper foundation for the officer's testimony; and without that determination, it will be difficult to properly word your objection(s).

Your last alternative is to contact the Torrance court, request a copy of the officer's declaration and all supporting evidence and documentation he included with it. That should reveal the survey -if any- as well as the potential content of the testimony he's likely to present in court next week.

Good luck!

ETA #2: what's your other ticket for?

[c is for cookie]

OH MY FREAKING BALLS!!!! I AM SUCH A NOOB!!!!!!!!!!! I was at work when I saw your reply and didn't have time to repost the documents since I had to leave for a meeting but I immediately disabled the link and took down the document. THANK YOU for telling me. Here is a revised link with all identifying information removed. Also, thanks for the tip on the survey and officer's declaration. I'll see if I can get that before my trial. Gonna go jump off a cliff now... because I suck at life. (sarcasm - not really jumping off any cliffs)

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B3G...eWxtOVpLaTd3UQ

Oh, my other ticket was for speeding as well. Driving up to SF, I got pulled over on the I-5 for going 89 mph in a 65 mph zone. He cited me with a 22349 (A) VC. I was really confused because I could have sworn I saw him pulled over off the freeway facing the oncoming traffic on the other side of a chain link fence that was between the freeway and the side road. Next thing I know, he's behind me and pulling me over. At least I think that was the same cop. I was going with the flow of traffic but traffic was going pretty fast. There were about three or four other cars that had been going the same pace as me for several miles and they sped off while he pulled me over. Sucks but I guess that's just the way it goes. My bail is due at the end of March and I'll be requesting a TBWD. I didn't realize you could ask for a change of venue when you're getting your ticket and since Kern County is nowhere near where I live, I doubt I'll be able to make a court appearance. Hopefully my TBWD comes through for me!

[California student]

The change of venue at the time when you get the ticket is only available to the county seat.

[quirkyquark]

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B3G...eWxtOVpLaTd3UQ

Problems:

• RADAR/LIDAR certification is performed by a private facility, and so cannot be admitted as an official (read: government) record. Someone from RHF must show up to get them admitted as business records.
• "Training record" is a complete joke --- doesn't even have the name of the officer. See this packet (and take a copy to show the judge) as to what constitutes ACCEPTABLE certification/training. The officer CANNOT certify that his courses were POST-certified by his own testimony.
• Any official records should have a true copy stamp and an inked signature of the responsible custodian (public employee). Check that at trial.
• You can try to go in person to TPW and get the survey. Or, since you asked for all documents and they never gave this to you, object again and get ANOTHER continuance. Also, note that since a justified speed survey must exist for the court to have jurisdiction to convict you of 22350, the survey may by definition be "exculpatory" and "material". Cite Brady v. Maryland (1963) US Supreme Court to the judge as to why they must give you the survey even without a discovery request. If you want to be bold, ask the judge to dismiss the case for this Brady violation --- it's a constitutional violation, which is the only kind of discovery violation for which a CA judge may dismiss a case.

You can search for other posts by me with the appropriate keywords for more details on these issues, how to object and what statutes to cite.

I didn't realize you could ask for a change of venue when you're getting your ticket and since Kern County is nowhere near where I live, I doubt I'll be able to make a court appearance. Hopefully my TBWD comes through for me!

Which court location does your ticket mention?

[c is for cookie]

Thanks, quirkyquark! For the packet that you linked to, is that the packet that ALL officers are required to have in CA? I will definitely print and take with me to my hearing. For the Training Record, the officer's name was on the first page which I blacked out, but that first page is blank. The second page that shows location and hours of training does not have the officer's name but the evidence was presented to me in a way where all 4 pages were given as one cohesive document. You still think I can make a point that the officer's name is not on the page with the details of the training? And what exactly do you mean the officer cannot certify that his courses were POST-certified by his own testimony? I'll study the Brady case and see if I can get the case dismissed on those grounds but the judge seemed pretty impatient and no nonsense so I'm not sure how favorable of a position that would put me in should he rule against me.

For my other ticket, I was in Kern County and my ticket is for the Arvin/Lamont court.

[quirkyquark]

For the packet that you linked to, is that the packet that ALL officers are required to have in CA? I will definitely print and take with me to my hearing.

No, that's the example of an almost-ideal packet from the CHP (the station responsible for Arvin/Lamont, interestingly...). CHP is usually better than local PD/SDs with their paperwork.

For the copy of an "official record" to be admitted, apart from the obvious requirement that it be produced by a government agency, it MUST contain a stamp saying it's a true/correct copy WITH the original (i.e. in ink) signature of the custodian of records of that agency. You object to anything that doesn't have that, including the training record.

And what exactly do you mean the officer cannot certify that his courses were POST-certified by his own testimony?

Well, he can testify that he has 24 hours of RADAR and 8 hours of LIDAR training (no paperwork needed), but not that those courses were certified by POST. That becomes hearsay, i.e. he is testifying that someone or something--who/which is not present in court itself--told him that POST certified the course. See:

In any event, there is no question that the officer can testify he or she attended the course. Judicial notice of POST regulations can then establish that the course is POST-certified.

DO NOT bother with Brady, btw -- your time can be spent much more efficiently researching other stuff.

For my other ticket, I was in Kern County and my ticket is for the Arvin/Lamont court.

It's a tiny one-judge courthouse. You may want to call the clerk and check if the judge is still Hon. Gary R. Witt. Back in 2010, he offered traffic school even after I lost my TBD. The Fort Tejon CHP station is usually up-to-date with paperwork, and will respond promptly to any discovery requests. If you lose the TBD though, your TDN will be transferred to Taft, where the judge seemed to be more pro-prosecution. In any case, 22349 is hard to beat on merits, so focus on the 22350 and take traffic school for the 22349 if you lose/are eligible.

[That Guy]

Problems:

• RADAR/LIDAR certification is performed by a private facility, and so cannot be admitted as an official (read: government) record. Someone from RHF must show up to get them admitted as business records.
• "Training record" is a complete joke --- doesn't even have the name of the officer. See this packet (and take a copy to show the judge) as to what constitutes ACCEPTABLE certification/training. The officer CANNOT certify that his courses were POST-certified by his own testimony.
• Any official records should have a true copy stamp and an inked signature of the responsible custodian (public employee). Check that at trial.
• You can try to go in person to TPW and get the survey. Or, since you asked for all documents and they never gave this to you, object again and get ANOTHER continuance. Also, note that since a justified speed survey must exist for the court to have jurisdiction to convict you of 22350, the survey may by definition be "exculpatory" and "material". Cite Brady v. Maryland (1963) US Supreme Court to the judge as to why they must give you the survey even without a discovery request. If you want to be bold, ask the judge to dismiss the case for this Brady violation --- it's a constitutional violation, which is the only kind of discovery violation for which a CA judge may dismiss a case.

We can safely assume that these maybe the documents the officer will use at the TDN, but it may be wise to also assume that the "packet given to then defendant" before trial may simply be the items she requested versus the items the officer planned on using in court... So we'll either need to see a copy of the informal discovery request, OR C needs to run to court tomorrow to request a copy of the officer's declaration along with the evidence he submitted, redact all personal info from those docs, and then post it for us to see (hopefully without having to request permission)...

Just trying to think out of the box...