ExpertLaw.com Forums

Found Guilty on My TBD - Is an Extension Given to the Officer Cause for Dismissal

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page
Page 1 of 2 1 2 Next LastLast
  • 07-02-2012, 04:24 PM
    MrP
    Found Guilty on My TBD - Is an Extension Given to the Officer Cause for Dismissal
    My question involves traffic court in the State of: California

    I requested a Trial by Declaration on 02/09/12 where I paid the $234 bail. My TBD documents were due on 03/09/12, also the date I submitted them. I received the TR 215 form last week where the judge found me guilty. Thanks to the forum's valuable sources, I went back to the court to see if I could obtain the officer's declaration to prepare for the Trial De Novo, if possible.

    The first clerk seemed clueless when I requested the officer's statement. She said the only form related to my case was this and handed me the TR-210 and got a Request for New Trial Form (TR-220) from her.

    I filled out the TR-220, got back in line, and spoke to a different clerk. I filed the form with him and requested the officer's declaration. He said there was nothing in the system and to try again in two weeks.

    THIS IS WHERE I AM CONFUSED.

    If you look at the TR-210, it was created on 3/20/12 (11 days after my deadline) and gave the officer until 4/20/12 to submit his declaration. Why did he get an extension?! (Explains the second extension listed on the court printout I obtained during a previous visit)

    Is the extension/delay enough to go in front of a judge and ask for a dismissal at my TDN? What can I do at this point?

    Copy of the TR 210: https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6t...UZUclk5VUt3MVk
    Copy of the court printout: https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6t...XJMRXBRS2d0RXc
  • 07-03-2012, 08:35 PM
    That Guy
    Re: Found Guilty on My TBD - Officer Given an Extension Cause for Dismissal
    Quote:

    Quoting MrP
    View Post
    My question involves traffic court in the State of: California

    I requested a Trial by Declaration on 02/09/12 where I paid the $234 bail. My TBD documents were due on 03/09/12, also the date I submitted them. I received the TR 215 form last week where the judge found me guilty. Thanks to the forum's valuable sources, I went back to the court to see if I could obtain the officer's declaration to prepare for the Trial De Novo, if possible.

    The first clerk seemed clueless when I requested the officer's statement. She said the only form related to my case was this and handed me the TR-210 and got a Request for New Trial Form (TR-220) from her.

    I filled out the TR-220, got back in line, and spoke to a different clerk. I filed the form with him and requested the officer's declaration. He said there was nothing in the system and to try again in two weeks.

    THIS IS WHERE I AM CONFUSED.

    If you look at the TR-210, it was created on 3/20/12 (11 days after my deadline) and gave the officer until 4/20/12 to submit his declaration. Why did he get an extension?! (Explains the second extension listed on the court printout I obtained during a previous visit)

    Is the extension/delay enough to go in front of a judge and ask for a dismissal at my TDN? What can I do at this point?

    Copy of the TR 210: https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6t...UZUclk5VUt3MVk
    Copy of the court printout: https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6t...XJMRXBRS2d0RXc

    Where do you see that he got an "extension"?

    The review date got extended but that did not, not that i can see, give the officer an "extension" to submit his declaration.

    Even if the officer was granted an extension, the court may extend any date, but the court need not state the reasons for granting or denying an extension on the record or in the minutes. From CRC 4.210(c).

    I don't see any additional forms where he had an initial due date that was extended at any point in time! I don't even see any of the forms he submitted so how do you know what date he submitted his declaration and whether he was early, late or on time?

    At any rate, if you're dissatisfied for any reason with the results of a TBD your only recourse is to request a new trial -i.e. a "trial de novo".

    And frankly, I have not come across any statutes that require your case to be dismissed if there are any questions regarding the preceding TBD.
  • 07-03-2012, 11:16 PM
    MrP
    Re: Found Guilty on My TBD - Officer Given an Extension Cause for Dismissal
    Quote:

    Quoting That Guy
    View Post
    Where do you see that he got an "extension"?

    The review date got extended but that did not, not that i can see, give the officer an "extension" to submit his declaration.

    Even if the officer was granted an extension, the court may extend any date, but the court need not state the reasons for granting or denying an extension on the record or in the minutes. From CRC 4.210(c).

    I don't see any additional forms where he had an initial due date that was extended at any point in time! I don't even see any of the forms he submitted so how do you know what date he submitted his declaration and whether he was early, late or on time?

    At any rate, if you're dissatisfied for any reason with the results of a TBD your only recourse is to request a new trial -i.e. a "trial de novo".

    And frankly, I have not come across any statutes that require your case to be dismissed if there are any questions regarding the preceding TBD.


    Does the officer share the same deadline to submit his declaration? If so, I assume it should be dismissed because I requested my TBD on 02/09/12 and my deadline to submit my declaration was 03/09/12. The notice to the officer (TR 210 form) was created 11 days after my deadline and the day I submitted my declaration. The form states the officer had until 04/20/12 to submit his declaration, which was an error on the clerk/court because this form should have been sent to the officer in February when I requested the TBD.

    Whether his declaration was early, late, on time, or if he even turned it in, I have no idea because the clerk did not have a copy of the officer's declaration. I did request a trial de novo, so how I can obtain the officer's statement prior to my new trial? Without it, I don't know what to do/say/request at the trial.
  • 07-04-2012, 12:41 AM
    That Guy
    Re: Found Guilty on My TBD - Officer Given an Extension Cause for Dismissal
    Quote:

    Quoting MrP
    View Post
    Does the officer share the same deadline to submit his declaration?

    Apparently, in this case it does not. Meaning for some reason or another, even if it was by error, it was decided that the officer's declaration will be mailed on a different date with a different due date than yours.

    Why is that?

    Because they can. I have already cited the rule that says they can and they need not provide you with an answer. But don't believe me... Go back to court and ask...

    So you go back to court and you ask "why did that happen?"

    They answer: " (no response) "

    There is nothing you can do to force them to answer and whether you can or cannot, you simply have no grounds to ask for a dismissal simply because there is no law or court rule that says if the events described above were to occur, the defendant's case should be dismissed.

    But you're free to ask for and move for whatever you feel is fair. Don't take my word for it!

    Quote:

    Quoting MrP
    View Post
    The form states the officer had until 04/20/12 to submit his declaration, which was an error on the clerk/court

    How do you know it was an error? Maybe it was intentional? Maybe it is part of Metro's local rules to only send the officer his declaration on the date the defendant's declaration was received!

    But even if it was an error, where is the court rule or the law that states that you would get a dismissal if such an error occurred?

    Quote:

    Quoting MrP
    View Post
    because this form should have been sent to the officer in February when I requested the TBD.

    Where do you get that idea from:

    Here is the rule subsection that refers to issuing the officer's forms:

    4.210(b)(5)Instructions to arresting officer

    If the clerk receives the defendant's Request for Trial by Written Declaration (form TR-205) and bail by the due date, the clerk must deliver or mail to the arresting officer's agency Notice and Instructions to Arresting Officer (form TR-210) and Officer's Declaration (form TR-235) with a copy of the Notice to Appear and a specified return date for receiving the officer's declaration. After receipt of the officer's declaration, or at the close of the officer's return date if no officer's declaration is filed, the clerk must submit the case file with all declarations and other evidence received to the court for decision.

    Where is it that you see that the clerk is required to send the officer's declaration at the same time yours is given or sent to you?
    Where is it that you see that the clerk has to send the officer's declaration within any sort of time period at all?
    Is it OK for the clerk to send the officer his declaration on the same day as yours? Sure!
    Is it OK for the clerk to send the officer his declaration a month later? Sure!
    As long as the officer's forms are mailed to him (thereby meeting the "must" requirement)? Is it possible that the clerk met his/her obligation? Sure!

    Quote:

    Quoting MrP
    View Post
    I assume it should be dismissed

    Again, you "assume" on what basis?
    Where do you get the idea that a dismissal is a remedy when the defendant suspects any of this?
    Or even when you can prove any of this?

    Is it in the vehicle code?
    Is it in the penal code?
    Is it in the rules of court?
    Or is it in case law?
    Because if it is simply and only what you think, without having any of the above to back it up, then you have no basis to ask for a dismissal.

    Of course nothing/no one can stop you from asking for a dismissal, but you'd be well advised to plan an alternate defense that you can present in case your wish doesn't come true!

    Quote:

    Quoting MrP
    View Post
    Whether his declaration was early, late, on time, or if he even turned it in, I have no idea because the clerk did not have a copy of the officer's declaration.

    Whether his declaration was early, late, on time, or if he even turned it in, and whether the clerk has it or not, you were found guilty, and as such your only recourse is to request a TDN. You have no basis to ask for a dismissal, but AGAIN you're free to do so regardless of what I say!

    Quote:

    Quoting MrP
    View Post
    Without it, I don't know what to do/say/request at the trial.

    How do you think people handled their trial de novo before we devised the plan to request a copy of the officer's declaration on this forum?

    They went without...

    But again, the fact that you cannot come up with a defense plan without seeing the officer's declaration isn't likely to lead to a dismissal. Simply because there is no law, rule or promise that you will be allowed to review the officer's declaration before your trial de novo, nor is there a law, rule or promise that your declaration will have the same mail date/due date as that of the officer!

    In fact, this is the exact dilemma that everyone who serves/files an informal discovery request faces... You get no reply, you appear for your trial, and come hell or high water, the most you'll be allowed is a review of the documents you requested under discovery just prior to trial. Similarly, the possibility that you made a request to see the officer's declaration and were told you cannot, the court will likely order the officer to offer you a review of his evidence just prior to trial.

    The question(s) that remain are:

    1) What did you say/type/provide in your TBD?
    You had to have written something in it?
    And if you were under the impression that what you included then was a legit defense, then why is it no longer the case?

    2) What was it you were cited for that makes such a complex case that you don't know what to do/say/request at trial?




    Clearly, with all of that, you aren't likely to be convinced; you obviously came here prepared for one answer and only one answer.
    Sorry I cannot provide it to you and be accurate and realistic at the same time.

    But more power to you if you can get a dismissal. I'm not telling you you won't succeed because I care whether you do or don't, I'm telling you that you are not likely to succeed simply because there is no basis for your request or assumption.
    There is no clear lawful authority (a rule or a law) that dictates a dismissal, and there is no precedent, that you can follow to suggest any possibility of a dismissal!

    This is unless you know something that we on this forum don't, then the following is the only remedy that exists in a case where the defendant is -for whatever reason- dissatisfied with the result of the process in a TBD:

    From VC 40902(b):
    If the defendant is dissatisfied with a decision of the court in a proceeding pursuant to this section, the defendant shall be granted a trial de novo.

    Additionally, you can read this case and see that the only reciourse available is a TDN:

    People v. Benhoor, 177 Cal. App. 4th 1308 - Cal: Court of Appeal, 2nd Appellate Dist., 7th Div. 2009
  • 08-02-2012, 02:48 PM
    MrP
    Re: Found Guilty on My TBD - Officer Given an Extension Cause for Dismissal
    I went back to the court and his written declaration is not in the system. My trial de novo case is set for next week.

    My argument in my written declaration was failure of "proper notice" - the obscurity of the sign at the time because of the setting sun and tree branches obstructing the sign since I was driving westbound. I included a photograph showing how the sign was "hidden" at the time and a chart showing what time the sun set that evening.

    - - - Updated - - -

    The officer who issued the citation is one of the 10 officers who sued the city for traffic ticket quotas, yet he continues to sit in the same location issuing more and more citations.

    http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lano...ket-quota.html
  • 08-02-2012, 07:34 PM
    That Guy
    Re: Found Guilty on My TBD - Officer Given an Extension Cause for Dismissal
    Quote:

    Quoting MrP
    View Post
    My argument in my written declaration was failure of "proper notice" - the obscurity of the sign at the time because of the setting sun and tree branches obstructing the sign since I was driving westbound. I included a photograph showing how the sign was "hidden" at the time and a chart showing what time the sun set that evening.

    So, in your opinion, traffic laws cease to exist in the westbound direction on that roadway during sunset?! (You never told us what you were cited for, otherwise I would be more specific). ((No, not more sarcastic, I said more SPECIFIC)).

    Would that apply to the Eastbound direction during sunrise hours or is that not an exception?

    Quote:

    Quoting MrP
    View Post
    The officer who issued the citation is one of the 10 officers who sued the city for traffic ticket quotas, yet he continues to sit in the same location issuing more and more citations.

    http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lano...ket-quota.html

    And of course, with as much attention and scrutiny as those officers, their supervisors and division are under during the time while their case is (presumably) still pending, there has not been any indication that any of the citations he (they) have issued were not legitimate? -Not a single one!-

    Correct?

    So answer this for me then... Is he writing more and more citations to meet a quota? Or is he writing more and more citations because more and more people are allegedly violating the law?

    And do you realize that with each and every citation he writes, the validity of his claim that his supervisors set unrealistic requirements for him to meet is less and less valid? Clearly by your description, he could have done this from the get go... But he heard of two other officers who won a case against LAPD, so him and his 9 buddies decided they wanted their share.

    Don't get me wrong... I could care less if they win, lose, quit or get fired.... But here we are a year after that story came out, and officer greedy is still gainfully employed by the same agency he sued... The LAPD... Does that tell you anything?
  • 08-03-2012, 10:59 AM
    MrP
    Re: Found Guilty on My TBD - Officer Given an Extension Cause for Dismissal
    Yes... the same way parking tickets are dismissed if signs are missing, obstructed, defaced, etc. In my case, trees from the corner house hid the sign because it is located behind a canopy of branches with the sun shining from behind the sign. Therefore a dark tunnel-like area is created at a certain time (fall season) where the sign is posted.

    I was cited with CVC 22101D - no left turns allowed from 3-7pm.

    Whether he sets up at this location to meet a quota or not, his hypocrisy sickens me. This is one of the reasons of why many Angelinos dislike the LAPD.
  • 08-05-2012, 01:43 PM
    That Guy
    Re: Found Guilty on My TBD - Officer Given an Extension Cause for Dismissal
    Quote:

    Quoting MrP
    View Post
    Yes... the same way parking tickets are dismissed if signs are missing, obstructed, defaced, etc. In my case, trees from the corner house hid the sign because it is located behind a canopy of branches with the sun shining from behind the sign. Therefore a dark tunnel-like area is created at a certain time (fall season) where the sign is posted.

    Wait... So tree branches are thick enough to completely block your view of a sign where you can no longer figure out what it is about but not thick enough to block the sun therefore adding to the reasons not allowing you to at least see that there is a sign?

    And of course that was the first and only time you've driven that route at that time of day but even then, you have made no mention of this to L.A.D.O.T. whatsoever; an email/phone call/nothing about the location of a regulatory sign is blocked by some tree branches. As long as you get your citation dismissed, screw every body else! Actually, your posting "yet he continues to sit in the same location issuing more and more citations" would indicate that you drive by there often. That might suggest you're familiar with the sign(s).

    And as far as parking signs, defaced/blocked/etc... you and I know that would not get you a few beans from LA Parking Enforcement. A missing sign will certainly do, but this, as you describe it, is far from being similar to a missing sign and as such, my guess is you're far from being close to a dismissal.

    Quote:

    Quoting MrP
    View Post
    I was cited with CVC 22101D - no left turns allowed from 3-7pm.

    Although only one is required by law, there are typically TWO "No Left Turn Sign" that are posted, one on each side of the street, or one on the left and the other in the center island if there is one.

    Additionally, the prohibition to make a left may at times extends for several blocks. Especially in cases where it interferes with rush hour traffic and with the 3pm to 7pm prohibition here this seems to be the case here. And when you see other signs before/after the one you claim is blocked, it would be easy to figure that a left turn is prohibited there as well.

    Assuming neither of those possibilities is valid, I'd expect that the sign would be visible well before and/or long after your so called "tunnel like area" is created due to all of those factors.
    In other words, for you to know there is a sign of some sort, to try and read it only to find that the sun/branches/leaves/whatever optical illusions you might want to create is only likely to exist and block your view momentarily.
    This too makes it a completely different situation than a missing "no parking" sign.

    Quote:

    Quoting MrP
    View Post
    Whether he sets up at this location to meet a quota or not, his hypocrisy sickens me..

    So you have driven by there again since you were cited? And in the grand scheme of things, you would not make an illegal left turn knowing he is there, correct? So while you can look at his being there as an attempt to meet a quota, and while we've already established that (1) he has no quota to meet and (2) even if he did, none of the citation he wrote were wrongfully written, his presence there does accomplish the main purpose for traffic enforcement... Preventing violations. And that sickens you?

    What hypocrisy are you talking about? You mean writing ticket and suing the LAPD for an alleged "quota"? Fortunately for him and unfortunately for you, his hypocrisy will have no impact on the validity of your citation.

    Far be it for me to even attempt to protect him in any way, but let me take this a step further, I think it will be in your best interest not to get all mixed up in a discussion or even a mention of his case while you're in court. You might see it as your way of getting him back by embarrassing him, but that is not all, the way it could backfire on you is not likely to leave you happy or satisfied with your "accomplishment".

    I can only imagine what the judge's reaction will be for you bringing up an unrelated matter with the only intent of embarrassing the officer.

    But for some reason I have a feeling you like to take those risks!

    Quote:

    Quoting MrP
    View Post
    This is one of the reasons of why many Angelinos dislike the LAPD.

    You and those many Angelinos don't know how good you have it with LAPD. I would love to see how some of you would react to the LA-S-D pissing on your turf (literary) . Let's just say you couldn't handle what they had to offer. So be thankful for what you've got!
  • 08-06-2012, 05:06 PM
    MrP
    Re: Found Guilty on My TBD - Officer Given an Extension Cause for Dismissal
    Quote:

    "Don't get me wrong... I could care less if they win, lose, quit or get fired.... But here we are a year after that story came out, and officer greedy is still gainfully employed by the same agency he sued... The LAPD... Does that tell you anything?"
    As stated, it's not illegal but they continue to operate in the same manner. Nothing has changed! So why sue the city?! That's what I call hypocrisy.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Is it possible to request traffic school along with community service in order to have my bail refunded?
  • 08-07-2012, 08:59 AM
    That Guy
    Re: Found Guilty on My TBD - Officer Given an Extension Cause for Dismissal
    Quote:

    Quoting MrP
    View Post
    As stated, it's not illegal but they continue to operate in the same manner. Nothing has changed! So why sue the city?! That's what I call hypocrisy.

    My comments -re: officer greedy- were only related to the action filed against the city/LAPD... As far as him camping at a location where he's busy writing 10 or 100 citations a day, I have no issue with that whatsoever. Those who would rather avoid getting cited and paying a fine can mind the rules of the road and they will be spared. After all, driving in a lawful manner should not be an option, it is everybody's responsibility.

    Quote:

    Quoting MrP
    View Post
    Is it possible to request traffic school along with community service in order to have my bail refunded?

    That is actually two separate questions, one relates to traffic school and as far as that is concerned, you have to request it from the judge at this point in time (unless the court offers it to you prior to trial). Community service is typically up to the discretion of the judge, as well.... So you'll have to get the judge's approval for it to work. Now whether it is logistically possible from a procedural stand point to refund bail and assign community service hours, I have no clue! And you'll have to run it by the clerk! You should keep in mind that even when being assigned community service hours, there usually is a fee associated with that. So you are not likely to get the entire bail you posted back.
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page
Page 1 of 2 1 2 Next LastLast
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:26 PM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.4
Copyright © 2023 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
Copyright © 2004 - 2018 ExpertLaw.com, All Rights Reserved