ExpertLaw.com Forums

Can the State Prosecute a Traffic Ticket After Five Years

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page
Page 1 of 2 1 2 Next LastLast
  • 01-21-2014, 09:46 PM
    steved
    Can the State Prosecute a Traffic Ticket After Five Years
    My question involves traffic court in the State of: WA

    I recently received a ticket in the mail. The ticket was originally issued in 2005. At that time I involved in a car accident on a highway onramp. In place of signature the word "INVESTIGATION" is written (at least, that's what I think it says. The handwriting isn't very clear. Certainly it is not my signature, now nor 9 years ago). It seems the officer wrote down the address on the front of my license, which was an old address (updated with the DOL but they don't issue new licenses for address changes), which is why I never received it. Is the fact that I neither signed the ticket, nor received it in the mail for so long mean a statute of limitations applies in this case?

    If not, what if I don't believe I committed the infraction I was cited for? I was cited for following too closely, but that's not what I did. In fact what I did was not look where I was going. The on-ramp was curved with somewhat limited but normally adequate visibility. However I looked away for a few seconds, and when I looked back forward, there was a car at a dead stop ahead of me. There was no shoulder on one side, a line of stopped traffic on the other side, and not enough space left between me and the stopped car in my lane to stop. A) How likely is it that I will convince a judge that I was cited for the wrong infraction? B) Even if I did, would it make any difference?
  • 01-21-2014, 09:49 PM
    Disagreeable
    Re: Statute of Limitations in Wa
    Are you sure you have not already been convicted or a warrant issued? When is the court date on it?
  • 01-21-2014, 09:58 PM
    steved
    Re: Statute of Limitations in Wa
    I have renewed my WA driver's license twice since then without issue. I only found out about it because they sent a copy to my current address a few weeks ago. As far as I can tell they are only charging me the original fine ($150) and not tacking on 9 years of interest and penalties. I contested the ticket and got a court date in April.
  • 01-22-2014, 05:34 AM
    PTPD22
    Re: Statute of Limitations in Wa
    I may be wrong on this, but I don’t think any statute of limitations is going to apply. The SOL provides for a time limit for the state to CHARGE you (not convict or bring to trial) after the commission of an offense. The SOL stops running when you are charged with a crime. Since a notice of infraction is a charging instrument, I believe that the SOL stops running as soon as the NOI is issued…meaning when it is filed with the court - not when you received it, regardless of how long that was delayed through administrative error. But, I am also surprised that the offense was not already processed by the court and your license suspended for failure to pay the fine…so, maybe I’m missing something.

    I’m more sure that your planned defense regarding the actual charge won’t hold water. I presume you were charged with:

    RCW 46.61.145 - Following too closely.
    (1) The driver of a motor vehicle shall not follow another vehicle more closely than is reasonable and prudent, having due regard for the speed of such vehicles and the traffic upon and the condition of the highway.

    Whether or not you were following too closely at the point that you “looked away for a few seconds” is irrelevant. You were, in fact, following too closely by the time you looked back and found yourself approaching the stopped vehicle in front of you and did not have sufficient space to avoid the collision.
  • 01-22-2014, 05:51 AM
    llworking
    Re: Statute of Limitations in Wa
    Quote:

    Quoting PTPD22
    View Post
    I may be wrong on this, but I don’t think any statute of limitations is going to apply. The SOL provides for a time limit for the state to CHARGE you (not convict or bring to trial) after the commission of an offense. The SOL stops running when you are charged with a crime. Since a notice of infraction is a charging instrument, I believe that the SOL stops running as soon as the NOI is issued…meaning when it is filed with the court - not when you received it, regardless of how long that was delayed through administrative error. But, I am also surprised that the offense was not already processed by the court and your license suspended for failure to pay the fine…so, maybe I’m missing something.

    I’m more sure that your planned defense regarding the actual charge won’t hold water. I presume you were charged with:

    RCW 46.61.145 - Following too closely.
    (1) The driver of a motor vehicle shall not follow another vehicle more closely than is reasonable and prudent, having due regard for the speed of such vehicles and the traffic upon and the condition of the highway.

    Whether or not you were following too closely at the point that you “looked away for a few seconds” is irrelevant. You were, in fact, following too closely by the time you looked back and found yourself approaching the stopped vehicle in front of you and did not have sufficient space to avoid the collision.

    In my state there would be a really good chance that a judge would throw out the ticket in court. What are the odds that the citing officer is going to be available to testify and actually be able to remember anything about the situation?
  • 01-22-2014, 06:11 AM
    Mr. Knowitall
    Re: Statute of Limitations in Wa
    Before we get to the likelihood that an officer will be able to refresh his memory from a ticket for an old offense (he can), or may have changed jobs, we would need to start by getting clarification on whether the scheduled court hearing is a hearing on the ticket, or a hearing to set aside a default.

    If in fact the ticket was filed five years after-the-fact, it is reasonable to infer that the state does expect to have its witness in court, but the defendant would have a due process argument that the delay was unreasonable, and that the effect of passage of that much time on memory and evidence substantially prejudices his opportunity for a fair hearing.
  • 01-22-2014, 08:46 AM
    steved
    Re: Statute of Limitations in Wa
    Quote:

    Quoting PTPD22
    View Post
    I’m more sure that your planned defense regarding the actual charge won’t hold water. I presume you were charged with:

    RCW 46.61.145 - Following too closely.
    (1) The driver of a motor vehicle shall not follow another vehicle more closely than is reasonable and prudent, having due regard for the speed of such vehicles and the traffic upon and the condition of the highway.

    Whether or not you were following too closely at the point that you “looked away for a few seconds” is irrelevant. You were, in fact, following too closely by the time you looked back and found yourself approaching the stopped vehicle in front of you and did not have sufficient space to avoid the collision.

    Yes, that is what I was charged with.

    Reductio ad absurdum: At some point I was definitely too close, that point being when my bumper was zero inches from the bumper of the other vehicle.
    Conversely, does it count as following if the other vehicle isn't moving?
  • 01-22-2014, 08:56 AM
    blewis
    Re: Statute of Limitations in Wa
    I'm not sure I fully understand:

    1) Did you JUST receive the ticket in the mail, or did you originally receive it in the mail in 2005?

    2) Is there a date on the ticket indicating when it was signed? If so, what is that date?

    3) When was the ticket filed with the court? Call the Clerk of the Court shown on the NOI and ask.

    I'm asking all these questions because IRLJ 2.2 (a) states:

    Quote:

    Quoting IRLJ 2.2 (a)
    An infraction is issued on the date the infraction is signed by the citing officer or prosecuting authority.

    Paragraph (d) then states:

    Quote:

    Quoting IRLJ 2.2 (d)
    When a notice of infraction has been issued, the notice shall be filed with a court having jurisdiction over the infraction or with a violations bureau subject to such courts supervision. The notice must be filed within five days of issuance of the notice, excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays. In the absence of good cause shown, a notice of infraction not filed within the time limits of this section shall, upon motion, be dismissed with prejudice.

    So, if it were signed in 2005 and only recently filed with the court, I think you've got an easy dismissal (I BELIEVE it would be difficult to show good cause why it was delayed NINE years).

    Now, my last question -- did the officer actually WITNESS the accident? If not, there's a really good chance that, unless the other party (the one you hit) shows up for the hearing (and they have no reason to do that unless they REALLY don't like you), you will most likely get off. In any case, file a discovery request to get the officer's sworn statement and let's see what it says.

    Barry

    Edit: you're right OP, "following too close" may be a bit of a stretch -- "negligent driving" (from your own words, see RCW 46.61.525) is more accurate. That's a $550 fine. But, it's your choice if you want to argue it.
  • 01-22-2014, 01:21 PM
    steved
    Re: Statute of Limitations in Wa
    Thanks for the replies everyone.

    Quote:

    Quoting Mr. Knowitall
    View Post
    Before we get to the likelihood that an officer will be able to refresh his memory from a ticket for an old offense (he can), or may have changed jobs, we would need to start by getting clarification on whether the scheduled court hearing is a hearing on the ticket, or a hearing to set aside a default.

    As far as I can tell it is a hearing on the ticket. The notice I got about my court date seemed to be a standard "you've contested your ticket, here's your court date" form letter.

    Quote:

    Quoting Mr. Knowitall
    View Post
    If in fact the ticket was filed five years after-the-fact, it is reasonable to infer that the state does expect to have its witness in court, but the defendant would have a due process argument that the delay was unreasonable, and that the effect of passage of that much time on memory and evidence substantially prejudices his opportunity for a fair hearing.

    I wouldn't assume the state knows its witness will appear. They might be re-sending a bunch of old tickets, knowing that most people will just pay the fine. For the amount at stake it doesn't seem worth their time to double-check that the citing officer is still employed with the department. There's a decent chance he's not - a quick internet search indicates the average police officer's career is 17 - 36 years. 9 years is 50% of the lower bound and 25% of the upper.

    I agree with your statement above - even if this had been 90 days instead of 9 years, the officer would probably not remember the particular incident and would just stand by what he wrote in his own report.

    I probably remember the incident far better than anyone else, and yes, after this much time has passed even my memory is missing crucial details.

    Quote:

    Quoting blewis
    View Post
    I'm not sure I fully understand:

    1) Did you JUST receive the ticket in the mail, or did you originally receive it in the mail in 2005?

    I don't recall ever receiving it. I assume it was mailed to an incorrect address in 2005, since the wrong address was written on the ticket. However that's just a guess on my part. I don't know why they did not add FTA, bench warrant, suspended license, or any of the other bonus prizes one can receive in a case like this.

    Quote:

    Quoting blewis
    View Post
    2) Is there a date on the ticket indicating when it was signed? If so, what is that date?

    3) When was the ticket filed with the court? Call the Clerk of the Court shown on the NOI and ask.

    I don't remember what day the accident happened, so I can't tell say how much time elapsed between the accident and when the ticket was signed by the officer. The ticket was marked with a filing date 5 calendar days after it was written.

    Quote:

    Quoting blewis
    View Post
    Now, my last question -- did the officer actually WITNESS the accident? If not, there's a really good chance that, unless the other party (the one you hit) shows up for the hearing (and they have no reason to do that unless they REALLY don't like you), you will most likely get off. In any case, file a discovery request to get the officer's sworn statement and let's see what it says.

    No, the officer was not present. The other party insisted on calling the police and waiting for an officer. To get the other party to show up, I have to subpoena them, right? How would I do that?

    Quote:

    Quoting blewis
    View Post
    Edit: you're right OP, "following too close" may be a bit of a stretch -- "negligent driving" (from your own words, see RCW 46.61.525) is more accurate. That's a $550 fine. But, it's your choice if you want to argue it.

    Sure, but, can they correct the statue violated on a ticket to a completely different one? Surely they can't issue a new ticket after so many years.

    Quote:

    Quoting steved
    View Post
    Reductio ad absurdum: At some point I was definitely too close, that point being when my bumper was zero inches from the bumper of the other vehicle.
    Conversely, does it count as following if the other vehicle isn't moving?

    Sorry to quote myself... Regardless of what I said in my self-quote, I (think I) get what you are saying. If I had, for instance, been following that car at a reasonable distance and we were both going 50 MPH, then they slowed to 40 but I kept going at 50, pretty soon I would be following too closely.
  • 01-22-2014, 04:21 PM
    blewis
    Re: Statute of Limitations in Wa
    Quote:

    Quoting steved
    View Post
    To get the other party to show up, I have to subpoena them, right? How would I do that?

    The proper question is WHY would you do that? If the other party does NOT show up, you will probably get this dismissed. So, if you WANT to be found guilty, go ahead and subpoena the other party.

    Quote:

    Quoting steved
    View Post
    Sure, but, can they correct the statue violated on a ticket to a completely different one? Surely they can't issue a new ticket after so many years.

    The court can dismiss this ticket and issue a new one based on the officer's sworn statement -- so let's assume you told the officer you looked away momentarily and POW! That's all it would take. And while the other party's statements to the officer are not admissible, your's are. RCW 46.63.030 (2) states:

    Quote:

    Quoting RCW 46.63.030
    (2) A court may issue a notice of traffic infraction upon receipt of a written statement of the officer that there is reasonable cause to believe that an infraction was committed.

    So, if you admitted you were negligent, then, yes, the court can issue an NOI based entirely upon your own words to the officer.

    Barry
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 09:56 PM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.4
Copyright © 2023 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
Copyright © 2004 - 2018 ExpertLaw.com, All Rights Reserved