ExpertLaw.com Forums

LIDAR Speeding Issued by the Highway Patrol on an Arizona Indian Reservation

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst Previous 1 2 3
  • 07-31-2017, 03:01 AM
    L-1
    Re: LIDAR Speeding Issued by the Highway Patrol on an Arizona Indian Reservation
    Quote:

    Quoting cyr0nk0r
    View Post
    I also fail to see how asking for corroborating evidence of testimony is bad form.

    I believe I explained this to you in my last post. I'm sorry you are unable (or unwilling) to understand.

    I see we are now starting to venture down the the road to El Toboso. Best of luck Alonso Quixano.
  • 07-31-2017, 09:50 AM
    cyr0nk0r
    Re: LIDAR Speeding Issued by the Highway Patrol on an Arizona Indian Reservation
    Quote:

    Quoting L-1
    View Post
    I believe I explained this to you in my last post. I'm sorry you are unable (or unwilling) to understand.

    Wow, that's a pretty condescending statement. Is that what this forum really is? People come here for help and to ask questions and when statements are met with skepticism you ridicule people?

    @Taxing Matters,
    I would argue that the McBratney rule is not a law or statue. The court suggesting in dicta is an opinion of the court, not a resolution of law. Or am I interpreting things incorrectly.
  • 07-31-2017, 10:08 AM
    Taxing Matters
    Re: LIDAR Speeding Issued by the Highway Patrol on an Arizona Indian Reservation
    Quote:

    Quoting cyr0nk0r
    View Post
    @Taxing Matters,
    I would argue that the McBratney rule is not a law or statue. The court suggesting in dicta is an opinion of the court, not a resolution of law. Or am I interpreting things incorrectly.

    The U.S. Supreme Court in McBratney and the following opinions of the Court and the Courts of Appeals are themselves a form of law — case law. The courts in these cases are explaining the jurisdiction of the federal government, states, and tribes as set out in federal statute. Arguing to a court that a U.S. Supreme Court opinion isn’t law or isn’t relevant because it is not a statute will show the judge how little you understand U.S. law. When the Supreme Court has said that the state has jurisdiction, then the lower courts are bound to apply those decisions and also say the state has jurisdiction. It is this feature of our legal system — that the decisions of higher courts bind the lower courts — that makes U.S. Supreme Court cases so important and why they get so much attention in the press. So discounting the Supreme Court and federal courts of appeals decisions is not a good idea. Instead, you need to find Arizona law that says the state has has chosen to assert jurisdiction less than what federal law allows it. I’m not aware of any Arizona statute or case decision that says that, but you are free to research it and see if you can find something to support your jurisdiction argument.
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst Previous 1 2 3
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:31 AM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.4
Copyright © 2023 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
Copyright © 2004 - 2018 ExpertLaw.com, All Rights Reserved