Results 1 to 10 of 10
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    4

    Default Should You Defer a Minor Traffic Violation

    My question involves a traffic ticket from the state of: Washington State

    Hello. My question is do I have any defense or any seen errors that I can use before I go to court. Thank you for your time.

    I have followed the Procedural Guide to Traffic Tickets in Washington State I have requested and received the Discovery packet from the Prosecutors office. I am unable to attach those documents at this time (forum newbe). I have sat in on a few sessions of contested traffic court. Based on that and the conduct that the judge has during traffic court. I think my best plan is to request a deferment. I just don't want to use up on a minor traffic violation. what are the chances that the prosecutor would allow me to plea to a non moving violation.




  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    18,827

    Default Re: Speeding Ticket Discovery

    Upload them to some other site (like imgur) and post links to the pages on that site.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    4

    Default Re: Speeding Ticket Discovery

    Here are the documents.










  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    7,599

    Default Re: Speeding Ticket Discovery

    The only thing I see, and it's a crap-shoot, is the officer states the SMD was checked at the beginning and end of the shift. He does not attest that he conducted the checks. It's a quirk that I believe has had some success in the past but it's about all you have. That's a pretty solid statement otherwise.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    4

    Default Re: Speeding Ticket Discovery

    Thank you for your reply. so try this first before the deferral?

    "Your Honor, I move to suppress the SMD evidence and move for dismissal. Officer Hayden does not state WHO performed these calibration tests, and no evidence exists to support that he performed the tests himself or that he had firsthand knowledge that the calibration was accurate. Furthermore, Officer Hayden does not state how long before or after the stop that said calibration took place."

    Or should it be directed at the officer not mention any training on the testing of the SMD device?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    181

    Default Re: Speeding Ticket Discovery

    The officer will not appear unles you subpoena him, do not do this or he can clarify that he did the testing. As free9man said, it has a shot but the judge might not buy your argument.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    4

    Default Re: Speeding Ticket Discovery

    UPDATE: Case Dismissed !

    OK at first I want to thank everyone that contributes to these forums, without you we would not be here. I have been researching thru this forum reading post after post of peoples experiences with everything from Law enforcement, judges and senor forum experts to come up with a defense to this case. I went in to court today with a plan. I was to read up to three motions (see below) and if all else failed I would choose deferral. I did not want to use my deferral on IMO a minor speeding ticket.

    Here is the way things went down in court today. I arrived to court 15 minuets early. I was nicely dressed with a button up shirt and clean jeans and hair combed. Judge explained to the court room as a whole how the proceedings would go and that the Prosecutor would not be present nor would the officer unless you properly subpoenaed them. Upon my name being called, I greeted the judge and explain that I have some pre trial motions. The judge stated that he would hear my motions, rule on the motions, then tell me my options available after. I was so nervous and could feel my heart pounding in my chest. I had been to a few contested hearings before today to prepare for my case, so I was a little bit familiar with the judge. As I was reading my first motion (see below), just after I read State vs. Leach. The judge stops me and researches the case. After what feels like a hour, more like 15 minutes. The judge has me continue reading. After I was done reading, His rule was that State vs Leach was pertaining to a criminal case where the State did not state what charge of misdemeanor or gross misdemeanor Leach was to be charged with and had no bearing on this case. I respectfully disagreed, explaining that the RCW had 3 subsections none of which was cited on the citation and was not clear as to which one I had violated. The judge stated on the citation it states that I was speeding driving 72 in a 55 MPH zone and that was enough of a notation.

    I explained I had another motion and was asked to read my second motion. After hearing the motion the judge read the affidavit of the officer. The judge agreed with me that the officer did NOT state that he preformed or supervised the pre and post shift test on the SMD therefor the statement was hearsay and inadmissible under the Rule of evidence ER 602 Lacking Of Personal Knowledge. The judge then stated that without the affidavit as evidence the State has no evidence and case, therefor motion to dismiss granted.

    I had the third motion, but felt it was the weakest of the three and never needed it. Thank you again.
    After all is said and done I feel that this experience has taught me two valuable life lessons. One always be mindful of you vehicles speed, and second when you don’t have knowledge about a subject IE traffic court and the rules of law; the best course of action is at least educate and defend yourself with all the tools available at your disposal.




    1.) Your honor, I move to dismiss this citation on the grounds that it violates IRLJ 2.1(b)(4). This IRLJ cites that, among other things the “statutory citation” must be cited. On my notice of infraction, RCW 46.61.400 was cited, which at first seems compliant. However, upon further analysis this passage of RCW has 3 subsections, which involve everything from driving too fast for the conditions to driving at a reduced speed when certain special conditions/obstacles are present. Because of this oversight, this complaint is not in compliance with IRLJ 2.1(b)(4).
    Investigating further, I found that this type of mater had previous case law pertaining to it in the case of State vs. Leach. In this case, the Supreme Court found that Mr. Leach was cited with an RCW reference, but it was not described which of the two offense described in that statute was charged. The court found his case constitutionally defective for not stating the elements of the offense as required by State v. Holt and further upheld in the opinion of this very case. The same constitutional defect is present in my citation and I would respectfully ask the court to dismiss it.

    2.) Your Honor, I move to suppress the radar readings per IRLJ 6.6(c), and move for dismissal. When the officer gives the method of testing using the tuning forks, he does not say that HE performed the tests, nor state the tests were performed under his direct supervision. If he did not perform the tests, his statement is hearsay, Rule ER 602 Lacking of personal knowledge. The RADAR evidence should be deemed insufficient. Therefor I move for dismissal.

    3) Your honor, I move to suppress the speed read evidence due to lack of foundation. Unlike some other RADAR units, the BEE III has a separate mode for tests involving tuning forks, as stated in the manual. The officer does not mention in his statement whether the RADAR was in the TEST mode when he conducted the tuning fork tests. Without this key piece of knowledge, I can’t verify that the RADAR was indeed in proper working order, consistent with the manufacturers approved methods, at the time of my stop.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    7,599

    Default Re: Speeding Ticket Discovery

    Congrats on the win.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    181

    Default Re: Speeding Ticket Discovery

    Good job. Congrats on getting the dismissal.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    788

    Default Re: Speeding Ticket Discovery

    Thanks for reporting back, looks like you did a lot of preparation and it paid off. I noticed that the officer used the term “was checked” 3 times in his paragraph about testing. To me the defense should be legitimate because he clearly avoided attesting to personal knowledge.

    1. Sponsored Links
       

Similar Threads

  1. Parking Violations: Is Blocking the Sidewalk a Parking Violation or a Traffic Violation
    By Scroggin13 in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 03-14-2018, 09:24 AM
  2. Speeding Tickets: What Are the Chances That I Can Defer My Traffic Violation
    By tthisisjenn in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10-23-2012, 11:58 AM
  3. Washington State Ticket, What's Normal, and to Defer or Not to Defer
    By exegesis_saves in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02-27-2011, 11:47 PM
  4. Background Checks: Is Possession of Drug Paraphernalia a Minor Traffic Violation on a Job Application
    By Brix in forum Employment and Labor
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-12-2011, 09:47 PM
  5. Search and Seizure: Pulled Over for Minor Traffic Violation, Police Searched and Seized Marijuana
    By harkoo in forum Criminal Procedure
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 11-17-2009, 10:24 PM
 
 
Sponsored Links

Legal Help, Information and Resources