Judge Denied Me of Traffic School at Arraignment

My question involves traffic court in the State of: California

I was flat out denied traffic school during my traffic arraignment...got clocked at 80 in a 65, Judge flat out said no. Can someone give me some advice as to what to do now, and if this is even allowed? Thanks.

Quote:

---

Quoting suprajza80

---

My question involves traffic court in the State of: California

I was flat out denied traffic school during my traffic arraignment...got clocked at 80 in a 65, Judge flat out said no. Can someone give me some advice as to what to do now, and if this is even allowed? Thanks.

---

Yes, he can deny you traffic school. I suppose you can always appeal and cite People v. Wozniak [(1987) 197 Cal.App.3d Supp. 43 , 243 Cal.Rptr. 686]. But, you would have to show that you were denied traffic school as a result of a policy or practice and that your request was not even considered by the court. Understand that the court does not have to give any reason for denying traffic school, so you might never know the court's reasoning.

Like cdw said, unless there's evidence that the judge denied the request without properly considering it, you are probably SOL. Did you plead not guilty and request TBD, at least?

Mind posting the judge's name and court? Sounds like someone in dire need of papering! :)

Did your courtesy notice say anything about traffic school? (what you receive in the mail from the court)

Quote:

---

Quoting quirkyquark

---

Did your courtesy notice say anything about traffic school? (what you receive in the mail from the court)

---

Yah I had the option but I wanted to double check in court...cause I wanted to make sure I was allowed to(found out you can do that at the dmv...)much to my dismay the judge flat out denied me.

Quote:

---

Quoting suprajza80

---

Yah I had the option but I wanted to double check in court...cause I wanted to make sure I was allowed to(found out you can do that at the dmv...)much to my dismay the judge flat out denied me.

---

If the courtesy notice said you were eligible and could opt for traffic school, this is total BS. It's called "abuse of discretion". If you have a little bit of time and think traffic school would really help you out, apply for a writ of mandate to the appellate division of your superior court. Read these instructions and then fill this form. It's not hard, you can fill it out with plain language (no legalese necessary).

If you DO decide to go this route, post back and we can help you with any form problems as well as case law citations.

If OP pled guilty, then he'd have file a timely notice of appeal. And if the case is ongoing, chances are the appelate won't get to his writ before the case itself is concluded, probably making it moot.

I do agree that denying traffic school to a defendant who is eligible to get it from the clerk (unless the record shows that the defendant did a lot more than what he/she got cited for) is flat out abuse of discretion and needs to be litigated tooth and nail in the appelate courts. While the case law doesn't require the reason for denial to be stated on record, there is a well defined set of circumstances under which a defenant is eligible with no questions asked. If such a defendant is denied without any explanation, they need to appeal their sentence.

But, the judge is well within his or her discretion to deny it after trial. Many judges will deny it if they find that the act was intentional or grossly negligent, or whatever they feel justifies a denial of traffic school. While a local appeal is little more than paperwork, filing an appeal with an actual appellate court is an expensive proposition and I doubt it would be worth the expense.

Quote:

---

Quoting cdwjava

---

But, the judge is well within his or her discretion to deny it after trial. Many judges will deny it if they find that the act was intentional or grossly negligent, or whatever they feel justifies a denial of traffic school. While a local appeal is little more than paperwork, filing an appeal with an actual appellate court is an expensive proposition and I doubt it would be worth the expense.

---

He said he was denied at arraignment -- before any other proceedings had taken place, so he was in the same situation as when the courtesy notice told him he was eligible. It may not be very common to go "confirm the traffic school option", but lots of eligible folks do show up at arraignment in the hopes of getting the fine reduced and then also doing traffic school.

The writ would go to "local appeals", I.e. Local appellate division so it's free besides time and postage. Also, there is a checkbox to request a stay which is almost always automatically granted until they consider the petition Procedurally, the bar is somewhat lower than doing an appeal.

Yes, a denial at arraignment would seem odd if he was otherwise eligible. But, there may be some policy or practice in his local court that we are missing.