CVC 22350 and 22349(A)

My question involves a speeding ticket from the State of california

got a ticket last month...still waiting to appear in court for it...but heres the breakdown....

disclaimer: i am not eligible for traffic school

i was pulled over for speeding in orange county stating i was doing a 74 in a 45...

the cop wrote me down for 2 violations...22350 & 22349(a)...

i guess my question is...
1. can the cop write me for 2 violations for speeding? isnt it one or the other?
2. when he pulled me over the only thing he mentioned that i as "speeding"..he did not mention how fast i was going until the ticket was written and was waiting for my signature. at that moment i was quite shocked to know he was claiming that i was going that fast. (especially when he checked off that there was "medium" traffic)
3. on the ticket he checked off that he clocked my speed with a laser gun..i am not too familiar with laser guns and their accuracy...how accurate are laser guns esspecially in "medium" traffic and considering that there was a semi literally in front of me before i switched lanes.
4.lastly, next to the laser box that he checked off...he wrote a 5 digit code...what is the basis of that code?

i plan on pleading not guily because i cannot afford to have another point on my record.

please assist me in determining if i have a leg to stand on (if any!)

Knowing this…

Quote:

---

Quoting az1

---

disclaimer: i am not eligible for traffic school

---

And this…

Quote:

---

Quoting az1

---

i cannot afford to have another point on my record.

---

One would assume you’d refrain from even coming close to doing this:

Quote:

---

Quoting az1

---

i was doing a 74 in a 45...

---

Quote:

---

Quoting az1

---

please assist me in determining if i have a leg to stand on (if any!)

---

If this is your only defense:

Quote:

---

Quoting az1

---

i plan on pleading not guily because i cannot afford to have another point on my record.

---

Then I’d say you’ve had both of your legs chopped up from under you.
Assuming he can legally charge you with 2 offenses for the same violation, I would say this: since he used Laser, and considering the fact that Laser can have more than a few ways to show error, I’d say you have a chance of beating one or the other violations. But not both. Pretty creative on his part. I think…

Now that we are done with the lectures... let's talk about actual defenses.

No, the cop was not being clever. He was being stupid. He can't charge two charges. The one you wanted him to charge you with (and the one you should defend against) is 22350. It is MUCH easier to beat than 22349.

You should quickly go to court and get arraigned before the cop has time to ammend the ticket. Once his superior see what a boneheaded mistake he made, I'm sure an ammendment will be on its way. Once you are arraigned, no ammendments can be made. You do not have to wait for the day on your ticket, you can be arraigned any day your court does arraignments (even tomorrow).

At your arraignment, the judge will ask you to plead. However, you should simply say "I would like to make a motion for dismissal as the ticket is defective on its face". Show the ticket to the judge. Tell him that he does have the authority to dismiss at arraignment as per Penal Code 1385:

Quote:

---

1385. (a) The judge or magistrate may, either of his or her own motion or upon the application of the prosecuting attorney, and in furtherance of justice, order an action to be dismissed. The reasons for the dismissal must be set forth in an order entered upon the minutes. No dismissal shall be made for any cause which would be ground of demurrer to the accusatory pleading.

---

If he refuses to dismiss the entire ticket, then you should ask that he dismiss the 22349 and proceed on the 22350. After that, you should plead not guilty.

Question: how many lanes in each direction were on the road you were ticketed on? If it were just one in each direction, 22349(a) is inappropriate also.

You should call CALTRANS or your local public works, depending on the type of road, and get the latest traffic survey. You want to see if the speed limit was justified. Many are not.

Once you take care of this, you should come back here and discuss what you have learned. Personally, I'd say you have a very good chance of beating this.

thats exactly what my game plan was going to be....i was shocked to see that the officier charged me with both violations....

as for the road is concerned it is a very wide 3 lane road and i know for a fact that 45mph is NOT a justifiable spped limit for that road....

the unfortunate situation behind the road is that it boarders 2 cities, so as you are drivingon the road, the speed limit drops from 50 to 45 and thats where they get you...

apparently this cop is notorious for issuing citations...

as far as the ammendment goes...i have yet to receive an ammendment in the mail so i guess its safe to say that a correction was not filed, but i did receive a MANDATORY TO APPEAR from the court...which i have never received before...what does a MANDATORY TO APPEAR mean based off a speeding tickets? is it because i received a speeding ticket 2 months before?

I don't know why people get those "mandatory to appear" letters. The court does not have authority to do that. The law clearly gives you the option of pleading and having your trial by mail if you wish. But, that is irrelevant as you want to go asap to get arraigned and make a motion for dismissal.

so just to understand the process correctly i should do the following...

1st ask the judge for a dismisal because the ticket is defective.

2nd if he says no to the dismissal, then i should request for 22349 to be dismissed and ask for a not guilty plea...

my question is...

1. can the judge completely dismiss my entire ticket even though i was speeding just because the ticket is defective?

2. lastly, should i only plead not guilty if the judge DOES NOT dismiss 22349 or tell the judge not guilty even if he dismisses 22349?

3. what is the reasoning for still pleading not guilty if the judge decides to dismiss 22349?

sorry for all the iggnorant questions...i wish i knew as much

i appreciate all the guidance!

Quote:

---

Quoting az1

---

i did receive a MANDATORY TO APPEAR from the court...which i have never received before...what does a MANDATORY TO APPEAR mean based off a speeding tickets? is it because i received a speeding ticket 2 months before?

---

Your mandatory court appearance is because of this:

Quote:

---

Quoting az1

---

i was doing a 74 in a 45...

---

And this is as best an explanation that I can offer you:

A court may require a mandatory appearance for an infraction violation of the Vehicle Code when a statutory driver’s license restriction, suspension, or revocation is authorized; community service or proof of payment or correction is mandatory; or a violation requires specific action under the Vehicle Code in addition to a fine. This paragraph does not apply to violations of local ordinances based on Vehicle Code sections.

Of course Jim is not gonna like me posting this... Or he's gonna say it's "irrelevant"... You can verify this information in court when you appear!

Actually, here's an example:
http://www.expertlaw.com/forums/showthread.php?t=75547

Quote:

---

Quoting That Guy

---

Your mandatory court appearance is because of this:

And this is as best an explanation that I can offer you:

A court may require a mandatory appearance for an infraction violation of the Vehicle Code when a statutory driver’s license restriction, suspension, or revocation is authorized; community service or proof of payment or correction is mandatory; or a violation requires specific action under the Vehicle Code in addition to a fine. This paragraph does not apply to violations of local ordinances based on Vehicle Code sections.

---

Nope... what I am going to say is that neither 22350 nor 22349 statutorily call for a suspension, restriction or revocation. So, if you can show another reason why a mandatory appearance would be required, then I'm interested.

Quote:

---

Of course Jim is not gonna like me posting this... Or he's gonna say it's "irrelevant"... You can verify this information in court when you appear!

---

Your point is irrelevant since the OP seems to agree with me that a quick appearance is in his best interest.

Quote:

---

Actually, here's an example:
http://www.expertlaw.com/forums/showthread.php?t=75547

---

What does that have to do with anything??

Quote:

---

Quoting az1

---

so just to understand the process correctly i should do the following...

1st ask the judge for a dismisal because the ticket is defective.

2nd if he says no to the dismissal, then i should request for 22349 to be dismissed and ask for a not guilty plea...

my question is...

1. can the judge completely dismiss my entire ticket even though i was speeding just because the ticket is defective?

2. lastly, should i only plead not guilty if the judge DOES NOT dismiss 22349 or tell the judge not guilty even if he dismisses 22349?

3. what is the reasoning for still pleading not guilty if the judge decides to dismiss 22349?

sorry for all the iggnorant questions...i wish i knew as much

i appreciate all the guidance!

---

I think you misunderstood. If the judge refuses to dismiss due to the defective ticket, then you should ask him to dismiss the 22349 charge as you should only be charged with one section of the vehicle code for one alleged violation. Then, if he agrees, you plead not guilty to the 22350.

Regardless, you plead not guilty to anything that he leaves you charged with.

And the answer to your first question is: of course he can dismiss based on a defective ticket.

Quote:

---

Quoting EWYLTJ

---

Nope... what I am going to say is that neither 22350 nor 22349 statutorily call for a suspension, restriction or revocation.

---

I never even mentioned 22349 or 22350. I merely offered the only available explanation to why the OP’s courtesy notice stated that he has a Mandatory Court Appearance.
Let me see… What did you offer as an explanation??? Oh, yeah… here it is:

Quote:

---

Quoting EWYLTJ

---

I don't know why people get those "mandatory to appear" letters.

---

Quote:

---

Quoting EWYLTJ

---

So, if you can show another reason why a mandatory appearance would be required, then I'm interested.

---

The paragraph I posted regarding the “Mandatory Court Appearance” is a quote out of a document that is issued by California Judicial Council. If you are going to suggest that the requirements set by them are invalid just because they do not meet your approval, then that is your choice.

Anyway…

Quote:

---

Quoting EWYLTJ

---

Your point is irrelevant

---

1st, how did I guess you were going to say that???

2nd,The words “Mandatory Court Appearance” are on the Courtesy notice that the OP received from the court. THAT, makes it more relevant than you would like to admit.

Those words are there for a reason. So even if you choose to dismiss them as “nothing” and if az1 decides to follow your advice as far that those words are concerned, that is his choice.

The Judge may feel otherwise!

Quote:

---

Quoting EWYLTJ

---

…. since the OP seems to agree with me that a quick appearance is in his best interest.

---

I did not post that information looking for anyone’s approval or confirmation!

az1 asked a question and I posted information that is directly related and stands to be the only available explanation to his question.

Also, and as far as his “quick appearance”, and for his sake, lets hope that the Orange County Court he’s appearing in isn’t as backlogged as the entire L A County Court system. If it is, he has a couple of months before he gets a look at the inside of that courtroom.

Quote:

---

Quoting EWYLTJ

---

Quote:

---

Quoting That Guy

---

Actually, here's an example:
http://www.expertlaw.com/forums/showthread.php?t=75547

---

What does that have to do with anything??

---

Let me see…
Both cases involve charges for speeding infractions….
Both cases are for 25+ over the speed limit…
Both cases are in an Orange County Court….
And both cases required a Mandatory Court Appearance…
You’re right… No connection whatsoever! :rolleyes:

Well... once again, here is a perfect example of how you post irrelevant information not for the purpose of helping the OP, but for carrying out some personal vendetta against me. You really have too much time on your hands...

Quote:

---

Quoting That Guy

---

I never even mentioned 22349 or 22350. I merely offered the only available explanation to why the OP’s courtesy notice stated that he has a Mandatory Court Appearance.
Let me see… What did you offer as an explanation??? Oh, yeah… here it is:

---

You offered that as an explanation of how the OP got a mandatory appearance... but as I showed you, the charges he was cited with do not warrant a suspension... hence, your cited paragraph is not applicable.

Quote:

---

The paragraph I posted regarding the “Mandatory Court Appearance” is a quote out of a document that is issued by California Judicial Council. If you are going to suggest that the requirements set by them are invalid just because they do not meet your approval, then that is your choice.

---

I didn't suggest anything having to do with my approval. I said it didn't comply with statutory law. That is the legislature's choice.

Quote:

---

1st, how did I guess you were going to say that???

---

Because you are at least smart enough to know that your post is irrelevant. If the OP says he is going to appear, what's the point of arguing a mail in arraignment?

Quote:

---

2nd,The words “Mandatory Court Appearance” are on the Courtesy notice that the OP received from the court. THAT, makes it more relevant than you would like to admit.

---

No it doesn't. It only means some pinhead clerk put a stamp on a piece of paper. It does NOT mean that it is a legal requirement.

Quote:

---

Those words are there for a reason. So even if you choose to dismiss them as “nothing” and if az1 decides to follow your advice as far that those words are concerned, that is his choice.

---

Once again... irrelevant. The OP is going to appear!! So, what's your point??

Quote:

---

I did not post that information looking for anyone’s approval or confirmation!

---

That's good.

Quote:

---

Also, and as far as his “quick appearance”, and for his sake, lets hope that the Orange County Court he’s appearing in isn’t as backlogged as the entire L A County Court system. If it is, he has a couple of months before he gets a look at the inside of that courtroom.

---

He can appear on the date on his ticket or before. Arraignments are simply done by showing up at the clerks window in the morning and getting on the calendar.

Quote:

---

Let me see…
Both cases involve charges for speeding infractions….
Both cases are for 25+ over the speed limit…
Both cases are in an Orange County Court….
And both cases required a Mandatory Court Appearance…
You’re right… No connection whatsoever! :rolleyes:

---

I still don't see your point other than you have some kind of burr under your saddle. I'm sorry, but I can't help you with your irrational bouts of anger. You'll have to deal with that yourself.