Wrong Section Cited for a Speeding Violation, Going to Formal Hearing

My question involves a traffic ticket from the state of: Michigan.
I already had an informal hearing and was found guilty, requested appeal and going to formal hearing soon.
The section on the ticket is 257.320A, 018A is written right under it.
What does 018A stand there for?

I'm cited for 45/40, 54/40 in remarks.
My issue is that speeding sections are 257.627 and 257.628.
Section 257.320A is "Recording date of conviction, civil infraction determination, or probate court disposition and number of points; interview; violation committed in another state." In the division: "CANCELLATION, SUSPENSION, OR REVOCATION OF LICENSES (257.317...257.323d)" "CHAPTER III OPERATOR'S AND CHAUFFEUR'S LICENSE (257.301...257.329)"

What section I'm cited for is even from the different Chapter of the Code!
Thank you guys in advance.

You went to a formal hearing and were convicted of violating what statute?

What offense is described on your ticket, along with the statute number?

I expect that 018a refers to MCL 257.18a, but that's a question you might better have posed to the officer at the informal hearing.

you could post the ticket....if they do not have the correct statue listed, seek out the law that requires them to have it.

Then after the state is done with their presentation of the case (testimony, your cross, their redirect) then request for a summary judgment as nothing that they stated supports a finding of the violation being cited on the ticket.

Its a de novo hearing I assume coming up...

I went to INFORMAL hearing. Requested appeal after ruling against me. Formal hearing will be soon.

Offense: Speeding 01 - 5 over limit. Speed 45/50
Remarks: S/R ACT IS 54/40

Statute: Ord: 257.320A 018A is written below O_o... no idea...

- - - Updated - - -

So any advice or am I forgotten?

- - - Updated - - -

Seems like a pretty easy question for a knowegible person. Any advice on what to do and what to say would be nice.

Do you think that you'll inspire people to want to help you by acting like a spoiled, entitled brat?

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/%28S%2...&highlight=orv


http://www.legislature.mi.gov/%28S%2...me=mcl-257-628



Without seeing the ticket, they cited the wrong section ... previous advice is affirmed .. motion for summary judgment after state rests ... object to any mention of speeding -- relevance issues

I'm sorry??
I trully thought this would be easy and it's just that I can not find the answer, but someone had experience or read the relevant law somewhere.
I've read threads on this forum and it seems some a lot tougher questions where answered really fast.
Sorry if I acted inpatient, just want some advice or something to atleast point the way of what/where to research.
Of course clear cut answer would be nice :)

After angry comment by Mr. Knowitall, and no answers, I guess nobody came agaainst a similar issue and can't help me.

Quote:

---

Quoting ivirus006

---

After angry comment by Mr. Knowitall, and no answers, I guess nobody came agaainst a similar issue and can't help me.

---

some folks get cited for wrong statutory citation ... let them proceed at trial .. then motion for summary judgment or acquittal after the state rests ... after all, they won't prove you violated the law that they claim you violated, right?

Know what I mean?

Quote:

---

Quoting ivirus006

---

After angry comment by Mr. Knowitall, and no answers, I guess nobody came agaainst a similar issue and can't help me.

---

Your posts are cryptic. You offer us information that matches notes that the officer wrote on your citation and rather than ask the citing officer at the hearing what they meant, you are expecting us to guess.

You were asked 2 questions by Mr KIA:

Quote:

---

You went to a formal hearing and were convicted of violating what statute?

What offense is described on your ticket, along with the statute number?

---

OK so he misread the type of hearing that you attended, you corrected him but failed to answer the first question: You were convicted of violating what statute?

The second question he asked appears to be a request for clarification on what you posted in your first post. In your next post, the information you provide becomes even more cryptic:

Quote:

---

Quoting ivirus006

---

I went to INFORMAL hearing. Requested appeal after ruling against me. Formal hearing will be soon.

Offense: Speeding 01 - 5 over limit. Speed 45/50
Remarks: S/R ACT IS 54/40

Statute: Ord: 257.320A 018A is written below O_o... no idea...

- - - Updated - - -

So any advice or am I forgotten?

- - - Updated - - -

Seems like a pretty easy question for a knowegible person. Any advice on what to do and what to say would be nice.

---

... and nothing in it is in reply to the ^^important question^^ that you were asked, which is:

You were convicted of violating what statute?

Common sense would dictate that if a specific code section is not a charging offense and yet you finds yourself "convicted" of some charge, that there was some sort of amendment or change to the code section. In other words, you were not convicted of violating 257.320A simply because there is nothing in there for you to violate. This means that the charge against you was changed at some point in time.

Was it changed? Were you notified of the change? Did you hear, notice, see anything at the informal hearing that would indicate a change was made? One or more of these questions would have to have a "yes" answer... But since we don't know which one, it is easier to simply ask:

You were convicted of violating what statute?

Don't just randomly answer just because. We need you to be certain that the information you are providing is accurate and correct. So contact the court if need be but do provide a correct and accurate answer to that question. Whether you obtain the answer from any documents you were given at the end of your informal hearing or whether you obtain it from whichever form you used to submit a request for a formal hearing, your answer has to be accurate.

If you do provide an answer, don't assume any entitlement to a response from anyone simply because if we have something beneficial to offer, we will post it. Otherwise, assume that the answer is "your guess is as good as ours".