Can You Get a Dismissal if the Officer Makes a Mistake in His Testimony
My question involves a traffic ticket from the state of: CA
I recently beat a speeding ticket. At one point, the officer testified that he calibrated his radar on the day of the ticket. I had the radar logs for that day showing that he did not. Should I at that point have asked for a dismissal based on an incompetent witness since he was "mistaken" about such a relevant point? What would have been the likely hood of success with this?
In my TBD I received a notice that said guilty and basically nothing else. How do I obtain the officers notes; are they even obtainable?
How do I obtain the transcripts from the trial?
THX IN ADVANCE
Re: Dismissal Based on Incompetent Witness
I'm confused. If you "beat" the ticket, why are you slogging this further. If you found the officer made a error of fact, you can certainly introduce evidence to the contrary. If that invalidates the state's case, then you can prevail. Just because an officer makes an error doesn't make him incompetent.
Your TBD won't tell you anything other than guilty bail forfeited or not guilty, the check is in the mail.
You make discovery by sending a request to the agency (the police) that has the information you are after.
You don't need a transcript to appeal by the way. You're unlikley to have a transcript directly available. You can go to the court and ask for and pay for a copy of the recordings made (do it quickly, they're under no obligation to retain these very long).
Re: Dismissal Based on Incompetent Witness
"[QUOTE"]I'm confused. If you "beat" the ticket, why are you slogging this further. If you found the officer made a error of fact, you can certainly introduce evidence to the contrary. If that invalidates the state's case, then you can prevail. Just because an officer makes an error doesn't make him incompetent."
I'm not slogging anything, I'm interested in the law and the process. I would like to know at what point a lawyer would ask for dismissal based on incompetent witness? I would think that if the officer cannot remember several relevant points and then testified under oath to something that didn't happen, that would make him incompetent to testify in the eyes of the law. That is my question to any lawyer or law teacher out there.
"[QUOTE"Your TBD won't tell you anything other than guilty bail forfeited or not guilty, the check is in the mail."
Will it tell me whether or not the officer even submitted a testimony?
"[QUOTE"You make discovery by sending a request to the agency (the police) that has the information you are after."[/
I know, I was trying to find out if the officer even submitted anything in my TBD and if that info is obtainable. I'm interested in how the process works.
"[QUOTE"You don't need a transcript to appeal by the way. You're unlikley to have a transcript directly available. You can go to the court and ask for and pay for a copy of the recordings made (do it quickly, they're under no obligation to retain these very long).[/QUOTE]"
I already appealed the TBD and won.
I wanted to know if I could obtain a copy of the recordings or transcripts made by the stenographer. Good to know they may not have them long; thanks.
Re: Dismissal Based on Incompetent Witness
Quote:
Quoting
blackjack21
I wanted to know if I could obtain a copy of the recordings or transcripts made by the stenographer.
You probably can.
Call the stenographer and ask.
You'll probably pay $3 or $4 per page.
I don't imagine that the stenographer will have any objection to taking your money and printing out a copy.
Oh, I see, you want it for free.
That's not likely to happen.
Court stenographers make there living selling the copies.
Re: Dismissal Based on Incompetent Witness
- - - Updated - - -
Quote:
Quoting
adjusterjack
You probably can.
Call the stenographer and ask.
You'll probably pay $3 or $4 per page.
I don't imagine that the stenographer will have any objection to taking your money and printing out a copy.
Oh, I see, you want it for free.
That's not likely to happen.
Court stenographers make there living selling the copies.
What on EARTH are you talking about: Oh, I see. you want it for free??????? I never asked for anything for free or even insinuated that.
Re: Dismissal Based on Incompetent Witness
In questioning you bring out the discrepancy. In summation you reiterate the evidence is not sufficient based on written and oral testimony.
Re: Dismissal Based on Incompetent Witness
1. There aren't transcripts taken in traffic trials. They're not required, therefore they aren't necessary.
2. I have no idea what adjusterjack is talking about, but if there WERE court reporters taking transcripts, it would cost a WHOLE HELL OF A LOT more than $4 to get them. The court reporters are paid by the hour (with a minimum) and per page. A simple hour hearing could likely cost you a couple of hundred dollars, not a couple of dollars.
3. CA courts have basically done away with court reporters in anything other than criminal trials ANYWAY. Written into new laws passed when the courts went broke a few years ago
4. Most courtrooms went digital long ago.... another reason for no court reporters.
and.... court reporters (not stenographers) make their living by working for the COURTS, not by selling copies. They're paid REGARDLESS of whether they sell a copy of anything.
Re: Dismissal Based on Incompetent Witness
Quote:
Quoting
Disagreeable
In questioning you bring out the discrepancy. In summation you reiterate the evidence is not sufficient based on written and oral testimony.
Thank you for your response. In questioning I asked if the officer had proof that he calibrated the radar. He did not. I left it alone because I figured the onus would be on the people to prove the radar was calibrated. I didn't mention the radar log I had in front of me proving the radar was not calibrated for that reason. I read several objections online somewhere when I was preparing. Objecting based on a false testimony was one of them. The sight then recommended asking for dismissal. I'm glad I didn't try this as it seems like the only thing I would have accomplished would have been to piss off the judge. Thanks again for your clear and concise response.
- - - Updated - - -
Quote:
Quoting
CourtClerk
1. There aren't transcripts taken in traffic trials. They're not required, therefore they aren't necessary.
2. I have no idea what adjusterjack is talking about, but if there WERE court reporters taking transcripts, it would cost a WHOLE HELL OF A LOT more than $4 to get them. The court reporters are paid by the hour (with a minimum) and per page. A simple hour hearing could likely cost you a couple of hundred dollars, not a couple of dollars.
3. CA courts have basically done away with court reporters in anything other than criminal trials ANYWAY. Written into new laws passed when the courts went broke a few years ago
4. Most courtrooms went digital long ago.... another reason for no court reporters.
and.... court reporters (not stenographers) make their living by working for the COURTS, not by selling copies. They're paid REGARDLESS of whether they sell a copy of anything.
Thank you also for your response. I have no idea what adjusterjack is talking about either, or why he would respond to a comment I never made. Maybe he was looking for a fight, or perhaps the voices in his head were talking to him again. Anyway, I could have sworn there was a woman in the courtroom typing notes. Are you positive there are no transcripts available in traffic court? Sorry to ask again but I figure it's easier than calling the courthouse and being led around in circles. Thx in advance.