Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    10

    Default Informal Discovery Requests in California

    I was given a ticket (code 22350) for going 61 in a 50. I contested the ticket and sent an Informal Discovery Request to the city and county DA as well as the CHP office that gave me the ticket. I received the information on the back of the ticket from the police station but no speed survey (which I have in my possession anyway thanks to the law library). As for the County DA I recieved a letter stating,

    "the court is not a party to the action you reference. We do not accept any sort of documentation relating to Discovery. When you determine the appropriate parties to serve with this request you may bring a Motion before the court relating to the Non-compliance of requests for Discovery if you need to do so to compel the documentation you seek."

    After reading some threads here it seems that they in fact are responsible for answering to my request--is that true? If not what is my next step and is this a cause for dismissal yet?

    Secondly I have the speed survey and the critical speed at the place I was clocked is 57, that seems to justify a speed trap since the speed limit is 50.
    The only fishy thing is that the front of the ticket says he used radar but his notes on the back read, " V.65 R.65 Car in Front 61 Overtake by ______" i can't make out the last word it looks like laurel but I really cant tell--does this mean he did or didn't use a radar and does that even matter in my defense?

    Any and all advice is appreciated--Thanks.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    LA LA Land
    Posts
    9,170

    Default Re: California 22350, Have Requested/Recieved Part of the Idr

    Quote Quoting SarahBP1
    View Post
    (which I have in my possession anyway thanks to the law library).
    Interesting... How did you get a T&E survey from the law library?

    Quote Quoting SarahBP1
    View Post
    As for the County DA I recieved a letter stating,

    "the court is not a party to the action you reference. We do not accept any sort of documentation relating to Discovery. When you determine the appropriate parties to serve with this request you may bring a Motion before the court relating to the Non-compliance of requests for Discovery if you need to do so to compel the documentation you seek."
    Why is the DA speaking/replying on behalf of the court?

    What items besides the survey and the officer's notes have you requested? If you think you need those items which they have not provided then let 'em have it, file a "motion to compel" and see what happens.
    Quote Quoting SarahBP1
    View Post
    After reading some threads here it seems that they in fact are responsible for answering to my request--is that true?
    Yes it is true... You've read PC 1054.5, I'm sure... HERE

    Quote Quoting SarahBP1
    View Post
    If not what is my next step and is this a cause for dismissal yet?
    A dismissal is not a remedy that is usually offered due to the DA's "failure to provide discovery" (see PC 1054.5(c)). The remedies available include but are not limited to, and I quote PC 1054.5(b) "immediate disclosure, contempt proceedings, delaying or prohibiting the testimony of a witness or the presentation of real evidence, continuance of the matter, or any other lawful order"... all of which can lead to a dismissal however, a straight out dismissal is not prescribed in the statute... Although it does happen in rare cases for Example.

    Quote Quoting SarahBP1
    View Post
    The only fishy thing is that the front of the ticket says he used radar but his notes on the back read, " V.65 R.65 Car in Front 61 Overtake by ______" i can't make out the last word it looks like laurel but I really cant tell--does this mean he did or didn't use a radar and does that even matter in my defense?
    If he marked the front of the ticket with "Radar" then he did in fact use it. He should have also included a Radar Unit serial number on the front of the citation.

    Sorry, I cannot decipher his notes either, No clue on what "V.65" or "R.65" might mean... "61" is obviously your speed... "Car in front" might mean you were the lead vehicle...

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    10

    Default Re: California 22350, Have Requested/Recieved Part of the Idr

    The law library at the Santa Cruz Courthouse keeps all of the speed surveys for the surrounding area in some binders for those of us interested in representing ourselves--all I had to do was pay the dime for each copy.

    Why is the DA speaking/replying on behalf of the court?
    --not sure why the DA is speaking, but it appears to be one of those standard letters that is sent out to people all the time. They also sent back my IDR along with those letters.


    What items besides the survey and the officer's notes have you requested? If you think you need those items which they have not provided then let 'em have it, file a "motion to compel" and see what happens.
    Those were the only items that I requested, so would you say that there is no point in filing a "motion to compel" since I have all the necessary info--even if they didn't provide it?

    My arraignment is tomorrow so I suppose I will just plead not guilty and wait for the actual trial to present evidence. do you think that the speed trap defense is the best way to go in this case?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    LA LA Land
    Posts
    9,170

    Default Re: California 22350, Have Requested/Recieved Part of the Idr

    Quote Quoting SarahBP1
    View Post
    The law library at the Santa Cruz Courthouse keeps all of the speed surveys for the surrounding area in some binders for those of us interested in representing ourselves--all I had to do was pay the dime for each copy.
    That is awesome... Now the question is, is that survey current? Was it done within the last 5 years prior to your getting cited?

    Also, read CVC 40802... Sounds like you've done your homework and you do know that its their burden to prove that a speed trap did not exist. So they must produce the survey in court.


    Quote Quoting SarahBP1
    View Post
    Those were the only items that I requested, so would you say that there is no point in filing a "motion to compel" since I have all the necessary info--even if they didn't provide it?
    Actually, based on what they've provided you, (“the officer's notes”), and although you did get the survey on your own, they did not get that to you... File your motion to compel, if they produce the survey fine, if not, object to their using the survey as part of the officer's testimony on the grounds that it was not provided to you as part of your discovery request. If the survey is out of the equation, they can't prove that a speed trap did not exist, and the court cannot find you guilty (see CVC 40805).

    Quote Quoting SarahBP1
    View Post
    do you think that the speed trap defense is the best way to go in this case?
    Yes, however, critical speed is not the only deciding factor as to what the speed limit should be. There are times where other statements included in the survey that can and do help make that determination. So just because the critical speed is at 7mph over the posted limit does not mean that the judge will side with you.

    Carry on though; you are on the right track.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    10

    Default Re: California 22350, Have Requested/Recieved Part of the Idr

    Looks like I will file the "motion to compel." I'm assuming that I send that to the court in order to have the DA provide the materials, not the police dept.

    Also, there are some notes on the speed survey that state,

    "accident rates, roadside conditions not readily apparent to the driver and engineering judgment dictate retaining the existing 50-mph speed limit along this segment of State Highway"

    that worries me.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    LA LA Land
    Posts
    9,170

    Default Re: California 22350, Have Requested/Recieved Part of the Idr

    Quote Quoting SarahBP1
    View Post
    Looks like I will file the "motion to compel." I'm assuming that I send that to the court in order to have the DA provide the materials, not the police dept.
    Correct, you file that in court with copies of your original IDR, proof of service, and the response you received from the DA and the court will eventually review your motion and hopefully issue an order to the DA to comply. There have been times where the court itself will provide you with a copy of the survey. That is not how it is supposed to work however, if that does happen, then you have no basis to argue that you never received the items you requested...
    Quote Quoting SarahBP1
    View Post
    Also, there are some notes on the speed survey that state,

    "accident rates, roadside conditions not readily apparent to the driver and engineering judgment dictate retaining the existing 50-mph speed limit along this segment of State Highway"

    that worries me.
    Yes, unfortunately, that negates the possibility of your being able to successfully argue that the posted limit is not justifies by the speed survey since it was determined "by other factors" that the 50mph limit should be retained.

    How old is the survey? When was it done?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    10

    Default Re: California 22350, Have Requested/Recieved Part of the Idr

    The survey is up to date, it was done in 2006. I feel like all the doors to a successful defense are slowly closing. I guess I will file the motion to compel and hope for a dismissal.

    Do you think that the 30 question defense is my best bet if in fact they do send me the requested info. I'm starting to think I should have just plead guilty and opted for traffic court.

    aarghh.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    LA LA Land
    Posts
    9,170

    Default Re: California 22350, Have Requested/Recieved Part of the Idr

    Quote Quoting SarahBP1
    View Post
    I feel like all the doors to a successful defense are slowly closing.
    Sorry... Still, you'd be better off knowing where you stand now rather than while you're there before the judge.

    Quote Quoting SarahBP1
    View Post
    I guess I will file the motion to compel and hope for a dismissal.
    Again, a flat out dismissal is unlikely, however, having the evidence excluded which can lead to a dismissal is the way to look at it.

    Quote Quoting SarahBP1
    View Post
    Do you think that the 30 question defense is my best bet if in fact they do send me the requested info.
    In all honesty, I have not ever looked at the "30 questions"... However, I have heard that they can be pretty effective in casting a shadow of reasonable doubt.

    Quote Quoting SarahBP1
    View Post
    I'm starting to think I should have just plead guilty and opted for traffic court.
    Traffic school might still come up as an option immediately before your trial... Don't fret though; move forward as planned and you'll make a better decision when you get closer to that day.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    10

    Default Re: California 22350, Have Requested/Recieved Part of the Idr

    I'm definitely going to go ahead with the motion and see how the cards fall. Your advice has been really helpful. I'll let you know how it goes.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    LA LA Land
    Posts
    9,170

    Default Re: California 22350, Have Requested/Recieved Part of the Idr

    Quote Quoting SarahBP1
    View Post
    I'll let you know how it goes.
    Please do.

    1. Sponsored Links
       

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Discovery: Discovery Requests in Riverside, California
    By sam_user in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 12-11-2009, 01:46 PM
  2. Discovery: Traffic Court Discovery Requests in California
    By Zod in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 07-15-2009, 01:33 PM
  3. Speeding Tickets: California Informal Discovery in Traffic Court
    By MichaelSDCA in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-04-2009, 03:42 AM
  4. Speeding Tickets: Informal Discovery for a California Speeding Ticket
    By Luckyword in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 01-12-2009, 12:27 PM
  5. Speeding Tickets: California Informal Request for Discovery Form
    By beefjerky in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-06-2006, 01:37 PM
 
 
Sponsored Links

Legal Help, Information and Resources