Failure to Stop at a Stop Sign, My First Ticket

If the notice says "Hearing", it is a hearing. If it says "Pre-hearing Conference", then it's a pre-hearing conference.

Yes, call the Clerk and ask how much a deferral will cost. NO, the clerk cannot grant a deferral -- only a judge can do that. They may, however, let you request a deferral by mail or even email, so ask the Clerk. Also, ask the Clerk for the address of the Prosecutor's Office. That's where you must "serve" your Discovery Request. You also need to "file" a copy of the request with the court.

When you receive your discovery materials, scan them and post them here (removing any personally identifying information). There are several people here who will help you pick them apart.

Barry

Quote:

---

Quoting blewis

---

If the notice says "Hearing", it is a hearing. If it says "Pre-hearing Conference", then it's a pre-hearing conference.

Yes, call the Clerk and ask how much a deferral will cost. NO, the clerk cannot grant a deferral -- only a judge can do that. They may, however, let you request a deferral by mail or even email, so ask the Clerk. Also, ask the Clerk for the address of the Prosecutor's Office. That's where you must "serve" your Discovery Request. You also need to "file" a copy of the request with the court.

When you receive your discovery materials, scan them and post them here (removing any personally identifying information). There are several people here who will help you pick them apart.

Barry

---

I can't thank you enough for all the help. So I can just download and print the forms for discovery, and mail one to prosecutor's office, and one to the court address?

My understanding was that there is always a pre-hearing before a hearing? Isn't pre-hearing the time in which they offer you a deferral if your record is clean? Also, this is an embarrassing question, but how do I find the number for the clerk? Is it just the King County Superior Court clerk's office?

look up the rcw that the officer cited you for. I hired a lawyer for the same ticket and this is how he beat it in court. The officer stated that I did not stop at the stop sign so he pulled me over and gave me a ticket. My lawyer said to the judge the rcw says when it comes to a stop sign you can stop at the stop bar or the stop sign the officer never said I did not stop at the stop bar. So case dismissed. try to pull it up and read it and then see what the officer wrote down on the ticket. Good luck...

Quote:

---

Quoting just a member

---

look up the rcw that the officer cited you for. I hired a lawyer for the same ticket and this is how he beat it in court. The officer stated that I did not stop at the stop sign so he pulled me over and gave me a ticket. My lawyer said to the judge the rcw says when it comes to a stop sign you can stop at the stop bar or the stop sign the officer never said I did not stop at the stop bar. So case dismissed. try to pull it up and read it and then see what the officer wrote down on the ticket. Good luck...

---

Interesting.

The ticket was for RCW 46.61.190:
"...every driver of a vehicle approaching a stop sign shall stop at a clearly marked stop line..."

The officer wrote underneath this on the ticket:
"failed to stop at stop sign"

Am I onto something, or completely off? :\

So after much contemplation, I decided to just go with the deferral. It's going to cost me $150 or so, but I guess I'll just learn from my lesson and pay attention to signs more >.<

I asked the clerk how to request a deferral by mail, and they said to basically write it on the statement, and send it in.

For anyone who is experienced with this, is this as simple as saying that you have a clean record and requesting a deferral on the form?

Thanks again for everyone's help.

just a few things:

that guy,

1. a huge portion of the questions i've read on this board concerning CA tix are answered in brown's CA book. a very significant amount of time would be saved by all posters if everyone was familiar with it before they came here.

2. i intentionally excluded brown's CA book in this thread. and while it's true he doesn't talk about WA specifically -except in some generalizations- it doesn't hurt to be aware of underlying concepts.

3. i never say, or imply, that anything in any book is better than any information in this forum.

4. i agree with bo3b johnson (sic) who says you should assume everything you read on the internet is a lie, unless you have a substantial reason to believe otherwise.