Re: Can You Challenge a Red Light Camera Ticket Based on Later Removal of the Camera
Quote:
Quoting
themadnorwegian
It may be hard to believe, but I've already cited the section of the vehicle code that deals with a Notice to Appear from an AETS. As long as the notice is:
- on a form approved by the Judicial Council, and
- mailed within 15 days of the alleged infraction, and
- mailed to the registered owner's address on file with the DMV, and
- is mailed with a proper certificate of mailing, and
- an exact duplicate of the notice is filed with the a magistrate of the court
Then this constitutes a complaint to which the defendant may enter a plea.
I dislike red light cameras. They were recently removed from my city after the council got tired of getting complaints from citizens, and evidence mounted that they don't actually do much for safety. The best thing that somebody can do, aside from handling their tickets promptly, is to contact your city council members and state legislators. They're the ones who change the laws. I'd rather that the police and courts follow the law, instead of making it up as they go along. But that also means that we need to be proactive about getting bad laws changed. Highway Robbery has a section on action and legislation. If you haven't already, I'd take the time to look through that.
I was just mailed a similar citation from a nearby city. I can attest that those two mailings, one from the police dept. and the other from the courts, did not meet the requirements of #4. Neither were sent with a 'certificate of mailing.' I knew that particular city did not allow the citations to be ignored so I went on their website so see my smiling face. I also knew that judges in that city allowed the courts to file against those that ignored the citations. But if I planned on ignoring it, I never would have visited their website.
I retained a lawyer for $250 to handle it for me. We'll see on Feb 14, how effective he is. At least one person here hopes I crash and burn. We'll see.
Re: Can You Challenge a Red Light Camera Ticket Based on Later Removal of the Camera
Quote:
Quoting
So Cal
I retained a lawyer for $250 to handle it for me. We'll see on Feb 14, how effective he is.
I'm curious how your attorney plans on handling the situation. Did he mention what his plan was? If he's going to attack your citation on the grounds that the proof of service is defective, and thus it doesn't constitute a valid complaint, he needs to file a demurrer prior to your arraignment. If he does go that route, and your demurrer is sustained, would you be willing to redact the personally identifying information and post a copy? I'm particularly curious what authorities he'll use to support his position.
Re: Can You Challenge a Red Light Camera Ticket Based on Later Removal of the Camera
Quote:
Quoting
themadnorwegian
I'm curious how your attorney plans on handling the situation. Did he mention what his plan was? If he's going to attack your citation on the grounds that the proof of service is defective, and thus it doesn't constitute a valid complaint, he needs to file a demurrer prior to your arraignment. If he does go that route, and your demurrer is sustained, would you be willing to redact the personally identifying information and post a copy? I'm particularly curious what authorities he'll use to support his position.
I'm not sure what his strategy is. I doubt it is proof of service. He did say my intersection is the best for him to defend in that city. I will definitely ask him afterwards how he did it (or didn't do it) but if I had to guess I think he has a relationship with the PA (or equivalent). All he told me was he strives for a full dismissal, but if that is not possible, he says it is relatively easy to get it reduced to a non-moving violation and the fine cut in half. Something tells me that the PA does not want to fight every citation that crosses his desk, that's why he is willing to reduce them and be done with it. IMO, it is not all about whether someone is guilty of a violation or not. There are politics, scheduling, and work load involved. But if you choose to fight them in court, the PA and the judge will rake you over the barrel just for wasting their time when they both know you could have taken the reduced fine beforehand. Just my thoughts, but I will report back after I pick my attorney's brain.
Re: Can You Challenge a Red Light Camera Ticket Based on Later Removal of the Camera
Quote:
Quoting
So Cal
I had to guess I think he has a relationship with the PA (or equivalent). All he told me was he strives for a full dismissal, but if that is not possible, he says it is relatively easy to get it reduced to a non-moving violation and the fine cut in half. Something tells me that the PA does not want to fight every citation that crosses his desk, that's why he is willing to reduce them and be done with it.
It's true that the DA wants to spend the minimal amount of effort on a case to secure a conviction. This is why it's possible to get a plea bargain in some misdemeanor cases by being willing to look like you'll take the case to trial, especially if it's not a strong one for the People. However, in California the DA isn't required to attend court for traffic infractions. (People v. Carlucci (1979) 23 Cal.3d 249, People v. Daggett (1988) 206 Cal.App.3d Supp. 1, People ex rel. Kottmeier v. Municipal Court (1990) 220 Cal.App.3d 602) With this in mind, it has never been clear to me how traffic attorneys manage to negotiate these deals. The DA is not involved. The court does give a lot more latitude to their own officers, as opposed to pro se defendants, but there are still rules. Maybe your attorney plays golf with the traffic commissioner, or something.
Re: Can You Challenge a Red Light Camera Ticket Based on Later Removal of the Camera
Quote:
Quoting
themadnorwegian
With this in mind, it has never been clear to me how traffic attorneys manage to negotiate these deals.
They may in very extreme cases... Such as when they have a defendant who carries a commercial license, gets cited and it turns out it might end up getting him terminated, the attorney then approached the officer with the consent of the court to see if there is anything that can be done to change it to a non-mover. It also helps that for a commercial driver, there are many more "equipment violations" that can be substituted (keeping a logbook is one easy one). But guess what... Not only is that attorney going to charge an arm and a leg (if your job is depending on it would you pay? Sure!), the offer that is made involves a much higher fine than what it would have been for the underlying/original violation. But to say that it happens on a regular basis, or that the attorneys handle such cases "in bulk" (So Cal's exact words, not mine)? Or that they only charge $250 for such a privilege? Or that they can promise you (a) a dismissal or (b) a reduction to half the fine? Someone is hitting the crack pipe way too many times to even dream of such outcome!
In fact if you think about it, the fact that there are no avenues where one can explore the possibilities to negotiate such plea deals as we hear about in other states might be one reason why most attorneys would decline to take on an infraction case... Too much work and no reasonable chance for a quick deal...
So Cal simply improvises all this on the spot, TMN.... And he certainly isn't shy about doing such a miserable job of it! This is merely a way for him to try and prove me wrong because I stated that there are no "traffic attorneys" in California and the ones who might take on a traffic infraction case are going to charge in excess of $1500... So he's adamant about providing that there is a traffic attorney in the LA area whom he retained for $250 to defend him in a red light camera case. Actually, he started with a story about his neighbor hiring an attorney in SAN DIEGO of all places, for a measly $100... No, I didn't leave out a zero, it is -according to him- One Hundred Dollars- to defend her against a Red Light Camera ticket... And yet anyone who knows anything about traffic cases in California knows that the statements he makes in connection can only show that he must be hallucinating! Keep in mind I myself have told him numerous times that California traffic cases are often adjudicated without the presence of a prosecuting attorney.
Its actually been a hilarious couple of weeks... I was cracking up so hard yesterday my sided hurt...
When you get some time, take a look at the following thread and you'll realize the depth of ignorance some people might be living through (this is where he challenges me as to what a "survey" means)... Needless to say, I was busy that day and couldn't reply, although Carl handled the facts much better than I could have... Can an Officer Assigned to Desk Duty Still Testify in Traffic Court
Re: Can You Challenge a Red Light Camera Ticket Based on Later Removal of the Camera
Quote:
Quoting
That Guy
They may in very extreme cases... Such as when they have a defendant who carries a commercial license, gets cited and it turns out it might end up getting him terminated, the attorney then approached the officer with the consent of the court to see if there is anything that can be done to change it to a non-mover. It also helps that for a commercial driver, there are many more "equipment violations" that can be substituted (keeping a logbook is one easy one). But guess what... Not only is that attorney going to charge an arm and a leg (if your job is depending on it would you pay? Sure!), the offer that is made involves a much higher fine than what it would have been for the underlying/original violation. But to say that it happens on a regular basis, or that the attorneys handle such cases "in bulk" (So Cal's exact words, not mine)? Or that they only charge $250 for such a privilege? Or that they can promise you (a) a dismissal or (b) a reduction to half the fine? Someone is hitting the crack pipe way too many times to even dream of such outcome!
In fact if you think about it, the fact that there are no avenues where one can explore the possibilities to negotiate such plea deals as we hear about in other states might be one reason why most attorneys would decline to take on an infraction case... Too much work and no reasonable chance for a quick deal...
So Cal simply improvises all this on the spot, TMN.... And he certainly isn't shy about doing such a miserable job of it! This is merely a way for him to try and prove me wrong because I stated that there are no "traffic attorneys" in California and the ones who might take on a traffic infraction case are going to charge in excess of $1500... So he's adamant about providing that there is a traffic attorney in the LA area whom he retained for $250 to defend him in a red light camera case. Actually, he started with a story about his neighbor hiring an attorney in SAN DIEGO of all places, for a measly $100... No, I didn't leave out a zero, it is -according to him- One Hundred Dollars- to defend her against a Red Light Camera ticket... And yet anyone who knows anything about traffic cases in California knows that the statements he makes in connection can only show that he must be hallucinating! Keep in mind I myself have told him numerous times that California traffic cases are often adjudicated without the presence of a prosecuting attorney.
Its actually been a hilarious couple of weeks... I was cracking up so hard yesterday my sided hurt...
When you get some time, take a look at the following thread and you'll realize the depth of ignorance some people might be living through (this is where he challenges me as to what a "survey" means)... Needless to say, I was busy that day and couldn't reply, although Carl handled the facts much better than I could have...
Can an Officer Assigned to Desk Duty Still Testify in Traffic Court
I, as well as probably many others here, are tired of you calling me a liar, among other juvenile names.
Two weeks ago you never heard of an attorney that specializes in traffic law. Now you seem to know all the traffic lawyers in the LA, Orange and San Diego Counties, what they are capable of, what they charge, what their track records are and how they negotiate and try cases. Boy, you've come a long way in only two weeks. You also claimed you know my particular attorney, yet you fail to disclose his initials. Why?
I have no interest in misleading anyone here. I also have no apprehension with disclosing to everyone here whether my attorney is successful or not next month. But I predict that if I come back with a dismissal or a reduction, you will refer to me as you do others that prove you wrong…you'll just call me a liar.
Why I respond to your posts - I don't know. :wallbang: