ExpertLaw.com Forums

Conducing a Contested Hearing for a Ticket in Shoreline, Washington

Printable View

  • 02-14-2019, 05:49 PM
    justiceforus
    Conducing a Contested Hearing for a Ticket in Shoreline, Washington
    My question involves a traffic ticket from the state of: Washington

    I am following the instructions Barry posted. I want to file discovery. I know from reading the guide I need to file with prosecutor and clerk. I have a hearing coming up in Shoreline. A few questions:

    1. The clerk said I could fax the discovery to court and prosecutor. Has anyone done this and is it a good alternative? E.g. how do I have proof they received it?

    2. I will likely ask for deferral unless I don’t receive discovery. I read in the guide that prosecutor will read sworn statement first unless there’s pre trial motion. If I don’t get discovery materials do I verabally make a pre trial motion? And if I did get discovery materials then should I ask for deferral before the prosecutor makes a statement? Overall will it be clear when I need to do what (I read about going to court before the trial but that’ll be difficult since they scheduled one far from me)?

    Thanks
  • 02-15-2019, 04:54 PM
    searcher99
    Re: Shoreline Contested Hearing
    Faxing might be ok, but for real proof you probably have to do service by mail following Rule 5 in Washington’s Civil Rules for Courts of Limited Jurisdiction. That involves including with the request an affidavit of mailing. To do that you can modify sample text in the rule, and then use the discovery template format while replacing the title and body to suit your affidavit.

    If you want help reviewing discovery, upload digital photos or scans (with your personal id and citation number redacted) to any free image hosting site and link them here in your thread. It’s always possible you could have other defense motions based on what you receive through discovery.

    Preliminary motions are verbal in most Washington traffic courts, and a deferred finding request is also preliminary. If a prosecutor is present you might be able to come a little early and ask him/her to amend to a non-moving violation.
  • 02-16-2019, 12:46 PM
    justiceforus
    Re: Shoreline Contested Hearing
    Thanks searcher99. I did some more digging in the forum and read this:

    But, yes, if your ticket had been filed with any King County District Court, you could have filed your response at ANY King County Courthouse.


    I’d have to drive to Seattle to file with prosecutor and would be easier if I could file copy in Issaquah king co. District. Is this still possible and is there any risk or downside to that approach (there systems aren’t linked, etc)?
  • 02-16-2019, 05:33 PM
    searcher99
    Re: Shoreline Contested Hearing
    You will be serving your request on the prosecutor and filing a copy of that request with the court. You must get the request to the prosecutor whether by mail, fax or in person. Only filing with the court is not service and the prosecutor would not necessarily need to comply with the request.
  • 02-20-2019, 07:05 PM
    justiceforus
    Re: Shoreline Contested Hearing
    Sorry, I made a typo, yes, I meant serve on the prosecutor. I also confirmed I can file with any King County Courthouse, so that's very helpful info.

    Hopefully one last question about discovery. Barry's template shows place for Case No. However, the Notice of Hearing does not have that anywhere that I can see. Only Ticket number (which matches the Infraction # exactly). So I assume I use that.

    Reference from Template Guide: The “Case No.” should be the case number shown on your hearing notice. It may be slightly different from the Citation Number on your ticket.
  • 02-21-2019, 12:20 AM
    searcher99
    Re: Shoreline Contested Hearing
    The ticket number should be fine.
  • 02-21-2019, 03:23 PM
    justiceforus
    Re: Shoreline Contested Hearing
    Thanks that turned out to be the case. Also for anyone else running into this, the Prosecutor's office is on the 5th floor in the Seattle Court building on 3rd Ave. and the clerk is on the 3rd floor. So you can get the prosecutor's stamp and then take it down and file the second copy with the King County District West Division office. This info would have saved me a LOT of time.
  • 03-02-2019, 01:00 PM
    justiceforus
    Re: Shoreline Contested Hearing
    I received my discovery that included a copy of the ticket and officer's statement. The ticket copy does not show a filing stamp anywhere. Do I need to contact the court and ask when it was filed?

    The officer summarized the facts and included his opinion on a key point, which differs from mine. I've read enough forum posts to know it's my word vs. his (and his will likely carry more weight in court). So I suspect it's at best 50/50 for me to defend the argument. So I'll first try to work with prosecutor to amend (given I have a clean record maybe that will work). Any tips for finding the prosecutor in Shoreline?

    Thanks
  • 03-03-2019, 04:08 PM
    searcher99
    Re: Shoreline Contested Hearing
    For electronically filed SECTOR tickets, tech support might be able to give you the “last modified” time for the ticket which would indicate when it was filed. Usually they are uploaded/filed promptly so the late filing defense doesn’t usually work anymore.

    You can try contacting the King County Prosecutor’s office. If a prosecutor is present there usually will be an opportunity to speak with him/her just before your hearing starts.

    You are correct that arguing circumstances will often not work for contesting, assuming your ticket is not for speeding. However if it’s a speeding ticket your best defenses would involve preliminary motions to get device evidence suppressed due to insufficient device testing or certification. Also if your ticket was after a collision not witnessed by the issuing officer, you might have a defense if no actual witnesses are present at the hearing.

    If you want help reviewing discovery, upload digital photos or scans (with your personal id and citation number redacted) to any free image hosting site and link them here in your thread.
  • 03-03-2019, 04:59 PM
    justiceforus
    Re: Shoreline Contested Hearing
    Really appreciate the help you've provided it's been very useful. When I saw the computerized report I suspected the 5 day filing wasn't going to be an issue.

    Regarding contacting the prosecutor's office - do you mean calling them before the meeting and asking who will be the prosecutor for the traffic tickets that day? Or actually discussing it by phone ahead of the hearing (I didn't try that because didn't think they'd be interested in spending time discussing it)?

    The ticket isn't for speeding - it's for another infraction in which the law leaves it open to interpretation whether the action was preventable. So I didn't upload the ticket because I figured that'd just be a waste of your time.
  • 03-04-2019, 09:11 AM
    searcher99
    Re: Shoreline Contested Hearing
    Quote:

    Quoting justiceforus
    View Post
    Regarding contacting the prosecutor's office - do you mean calling them before the meeting and asking who will be the prosecutor for the traffic tickets that day? Or actually discussing it by phone ahead of the hearing (I didn't try that because didn't think they'd be interested in spending time discussing it)?

    The ticket isn't for speeding - it's for another infraction in which the law leaves it open to interpretation whether the action was preventable. So I didn't upload the ticket because I figured that'd just be a waste of your time.

    There is no harm in trying to call the prosecutor’s office. One thing you can do is ask either a clerk for the prosecutor or court whether someone will represent the prosecution at the hearing, or if you will only be dealing with a judge.

    If you don’t mind uploading the officer’s statement (redacted of course) I’m always interested and you would not be wasting anyone’s time. Probably you will do best to seek a non-moving amended charge or deferred finding, but there’s a small chance that someone can make useful suggestions or even spot a possible defense.
  • 03-07-2019, 11:10 AM
    justiceforus
    Re: Shoreline Contested Hearing
    Wasn't able to get on again until today. Here's the link to the officer's statement: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1kk9...ew?usp=sharing

    My hearing's coming up so any input is appreciated.
  • 03-07-2019, 06:48 PM
    searcher99
    Re: Shoreline Contested Hearing
    What code section were you charged with? You’ve consistently avoided mentioning that. Also you have redacted the location, which might be helpful and does not identify you. What elements in the officer’s statement do you disagree with?
  • 03-07-2019, 07:20 PM
    justiceforus
    Re: Shoreline Contested Hearing
    Fair point, I thought I'd noted it earlier. It's for RCW 46.61.212 (failing to yield to emergency vehicles). The location was Eastbound I-90. The reason for the lane change was to avoid a collision as the truck ahead of me was braking quickly (and lane 3 was occupied). I didn't see the officer until after the lane change (more large trucks ahead of me blocked my view).

    I disagree with the statement that I could've moved back to Lane 2. As I neared the officer, that lane was then obstructed by the slowing trucks. As written, the officer mentioned no vehicles behind me, but didn't mention the other vehicles near near me. So it sounds like I was free to move about as I pleased, but I was blocked. He does note that I stated I was passing the car vs. a car, which perhaps implies he saw it but I don't know if that's enough to argue that he agreed I was actually avoiding another vehicle (or if it makes a difference).

    The second point of disagreement is about slowing down. I did. However, that doesn't seem material to this. The law notes reducing speed on a highway with less than 4 lanes, but it doesn't state that for a highway with 4 or more lanes (as was the case here). As I think this through, I wonder how relevant that is.
  • 03-07-2019, 09:18 PM
    joef
    Re: Shoreline Contested Hearing
    Quote:

    Quoting justiceforus
    View Post
    The second point of disagreement is about slowing down. I did. However, that doesn't seem material to this. The law notes reducing speed on a highway with less than 4 lanes, but it doesn't state that for a highway with 4 or more lanes (as was the case here). As I think this through, I wonder how relevant that is.

    Section 1. i references 4 or more lanes and you need to move over. Section 1. iii says if you can’t move over, yield and slow down. How much to slow down is not defined and usually drivers and officers who are at risk have different opinions. Obviously 65 to 60 is not enough, but is 50 enough, 40?
    Since the standard for conviction is not reasonable doubt but preponerance of the evidence I expect you to have trouble prevailing since the officer felt you did not do enough to keep him safe to pursue and ticket you.
  • 03-07-2019, 10:57 PM
    justiceforus
    Re: Shoreline Contested Hearing
    Thanks joef. I early on expected this would be based on preponderance of evidence. For all the years I've been driving I've stayed clear of any vehicle pulled to the side of the ride (whether emergency or not). I never had any infractions. Sometimes there is no best option - cause an accident or stay in the lane and slow down. That's why I think the law is written the way it is (to balance safety of the people on the side of the road with others that may be endangered by someone taking an action to avoid a ticket at all costs). I did what I thought was the safest for me and all those around me. I hope that I'm able to resolve it with the courts with that in mind, and if not, then I feel ok that nobody was hurt.
  • 03-08-2019, 07:06 AM
    searcher99
    Re: Shoreline Contested Hearing
    Thanks for posting the officer’s statement. This information, plus any follow-up you can provide helps to improve this forum over time. I don’t know very much about this kind of ticket, but it looks to me like you might have a shot with some judges after offering your version of the facts. Here are a few of my observations:

    1. The officer stated that you passed him without slowing down. This requires a visual estimate of your speed, but he does not attest to being trained in visual speed estimation.
    2. The officer stated that his location was on a hill. This corroborates your description about the slowing trucks preventing you from moving over as you approached his location.
    3. The officer stated that you took the exit before he pulled you over, meaning that it was prudent for you to stay in the right lane.
    4. The officer makes no statement as to how close you passed the shoulder, so perhaps there was some margin of safety.

    Regarding point #1, you can also try a preliminary motion to suppress or exclude the officer’s statement about your speed due to lack of foundation, because he does not attest to any training in visual speed estimation. If your want to do that, announce that you have motions immediately when your case is called, before the officer’s statement is read into the record and before you are sworn in for testimony.

    If your motion is granted, you can argue that RCW 46.61.212 section (iii) applies to the situation due to the officer’s statement about the long grade and your testimony about slow moving trucks. Then you can argue insufficient evidence about your speed, and that the officer’s statement lacks necessary elements to prove the charge.

    If a prosecutor is present just before the hearing, you can try presenting the above since there is a small chance he/she might agree and ask the judge to dismiss, or offer to amend to a non-moving violation. If an amended charge is offered, your decision should be based on whether you want to risk a possible finding of “committed” or pay some money to keep it from affecting your insurance. If nothing is offered, or no prosecutor is in attendance, and if you don’t want to risk losing then the safe option is to immediately ask for a deferred finding.
  • 03-08-2019, 03:04 PM
    justiceforus
    Re: Shoreline Contested Hearing
    Big thanks to Barry and to searcher99 - the overall doc and your replies really help me be prepared. I was able to use this information to explain my position with the prosecutor who agreed to amend to non-moving violation (that seemed to be the standard for amendments for me and others - so this ended up being a seat belt infraction; the judge explained earlier that was a nmv that was not reported by the court). The fine was reduced (to what I assume is an amount for the seat belt infraction). I didn't get a confirmation on my receipt that I paid for that infraction so hopefully the system works and is updated accordingly (and I expected that the lower fee is also proof that it matches the nmv).

    Shoreline court was run very well. The prosecutor was very attentive ensuring that those coming into the court had a chance to speak with him. The judge provided a clear overview of the process and what to expect. There were a lot of attorneys representing clients and I can see where that would be a good alternative for someone that didn't have the time for research and going to court. Personally, I enjoyed learning more about the law and also observing our courts in action operating as I would hope them to operate.
  • 03-08-2019, 10:49 PM
    searcher99
    Re: Shoreline Contested Hearing
    Thanks for the update and court information. I’m glad you were able to come up with an acceptable resolution. You can look up fines for all types of infractions on the Bail Schedule for Washington State courts. That way you can confirm that the fine you paid was for seat belts, which is on page 43.
  • 03-08-2019, 11:37 PM
    Taxing Matters
    Re: Shoreline Contested Hearing
    Quote:

    Quoting searcher99
    View Post

    The officer stated that you passed him without slowing down. This requires a visual estimate of your speed, but he does not attest to being trained in visual speed estimation.

    Nor would that attestation be needed, in my view. That statement is not one regarding the speed the OP was traveling. It is statement regarding a change in speed. And one need not be trained in estimation of speed to see if a vehicle is slowing or gaining speed relative to your own vehicle.
  • 03-09-2019, 12:47 AM
    searcher99
    Re: Shoreline Contested Hearing
    TM, thanks for your input. Probably I was reaching a bit much on that one.

    Quote:

    Quoting Taxing Matters
    View Post
    Nor would that attestation be needed, in my view. That statement is not one regarding the speed the OP was traveling. It is statement regarding a change in speed. And one need not be trained in estimation of speed to see if a vehicle is slowing or gaining speed relative to your own vehicle.

    TM, thanks for your input. Probably I was reaching a bit much on that one.
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:18 AM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.4
Copyright © 2023 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
Copyright © 2004 - 2018 ExpertLaw.com, All Rights Reserved