Update: On their own, the App. Div. refused to file and kicked the record back to the trial court.
11/18/2011 Record Returned-Trial Court-APLT
Filed by Clerk
Hopefully this leads to things being made right. If the incorrect record is filed, then based on statements in tentative rulings like the below, I think it's best to do the "right thing" and petition for a writ of mandate to have the trial judge correct and settle the statement.
Quoting BR049175 RODRIGUEZ Ke D Ka
I was doing some research last night and happened to come across the following paragraph from People v. Stone, 190 Cal. App. Supp. 3d 1 - Cal: Court of Appeal 1987:
Sound familiar?Additionally, the People argue that we have only to look at section 40802, subdivision (b) to see that the Legislature did not intend the rules regarding the use of radar evidence to be universally applicable. The People note that section 40802, subdivision (b) specifically exempts "local streets and roads" from its definition of a speed trap. Thus, they argue, it is apparent that 9*9 section 40801 et seq. cannot be construed to apply to violations of a local municipal code. The People conclude that the trial courts did not err in admitting the officers' testimony into evidence without the production of engineering and traffic surveys.
I don't know whether the rebuttal offered by the court would be pertinent to your case in any way or if it can be of any help to you at this point, still, I thought I'd mention it!
^^^^ Thanks! I'd read this at some point but the reminder really helps. It's helpful if only to heap more scorn upon the judge's reasoning!
Has your trauma over your CHP betrayal subsided enough to let us know the details?
LOL... Actually, I've requested and received a copy of the most current E&T survey (yes, it was indeed a sppuh... A Sppppuhhh... A SPEEEDING Ticket)
I will likely scan it and upload it later on tonight... Then I'll type up the basic details and hope for some input...
Just read through everything again since it looks like I have to do this procedure as well. I have a feeling the electronic recording won't exist when I ask the clerk.
Quirky, are you going to show up for the oral argument portion of the appeal? Or do you think you can build a strong enough case through the briefs that you won't have to appear?
Time for the latest updates in this ongoing saga...
When I last checked in, the appellate division had kicked the record back to the trial court for an unspecified reason.
Hoping that was to correct THE problem was a false hope...turns out the reason was that the trial court DIDN'T serve the record on the City Attorney. Although the final record was filed on 11/29, it didn't update on the website until 12/8, when the notice of opening brief due dates was sent out.
Anyway, the LASC App. Div. is big on "the trial judge is the final arbiter of correctness of the statement on appeal"--didn't want to take a risk, and I wanted to try to get the judge smacked down by the app. div. So I prepared and filed a writ petition. The APP-151 form you must usually use is a PITA once you've written a few legal documents, and my experience using it in my other case (demurrer) wasn't a good one. For good cause, you can file a regular petition, so I did. It's probably overdone, at ~4,250 words (infraction briefs are limited to 5,100 words, except for good cause), but hey, I did it as much for the result as for the experience.
Also, got the laser calibration certificate via public records request from the LAPD. From a private entity, etc. In case anyone needs to get anything from the LAPD, here's my original request and the nastygram after I was told on the phone, 14 days or so after the request was received, that it might be a week or two or three... (the nastygram worked.)
Filing the petition in the Stanley Mosk Courthouse was also educational. Since writs are technically civil matters, even if related to a criminal matter, you need to file it with the Civil Division, who require you to use the LASC's "Civil" cover sheets/addendum even though they contain no reference to criminal matters whatsoever.