Traffic Ticket Advice (San Jose, Sacramento, Plymouth: 2013, insurance, attorney)

[nzib]

Hi, city-data.

I have a traffic ticket I am fighting, and I wanted to run the letter I will be sending for my "trial by mail" by you guys real quick.

Are there any other arguments I can use to make my case sound better? Do the points I bring up even sound relevant?

Please, do not take the time and trouble to respond if you have no familiarity with the "trial by mail" system, believe that our authorities are infallible, or believe that "for your own good" is a perfectly reasonable justification for laws.

I got a $1200 traffic ticket and a half-hour long interrogation in the back of a police car for "wearing a seatbelt improperly", and I do not think that is fair.

What do you think?

Without further ado, here is my letter:

"I live in San Jose, and I am going to school for computer science. I do not have much money, and drive a 1990 blue Plymouth Voyager.

I contend that I am not guilty of the violation.

I was stopped by an officer for putting my head and arm out the window while driving for a space of about 300 feet. This was in the middle of the night, with no traffic in sight before or behind. There is no law against this, and, though I had my seatbelt on, the officer wrote me up for a 27315 violation. The superior court sent me a ticket with $1,169 bail.

The stop was only the beginning, though.
When the officer approached, he did not, apparently, take kindly to my asking him why I had been stopped. I told him I did not know, and that I would prefer he make that determination.

At that point, the officer, apparently, decided that I was being difficult, and ordered me out of the car.
When continued to reserve the right to not incriminate myself, the officer “detained” me in the back of the cruiser, continually prodding me for more information about my supposed misdeeds.

The door of my van was left open, hastily parked on the side of the road, while the officer threatened me with everything from a charge for reckless driving to taking me down to the station and towing the car.

Though I took it stoically, I was not pleased with these tactics, especially given the spurious grounds for my detainment to begin with."


Well, thanks for reading that! If you're not yet bored to tears, here are various other lines of argument I considered:

I looked into this, no where does the law define what is considered
"Properly restrained". In researching this on the web, one person was
challenging CVC 27315 (d)(1) because the law (as cited on her ticket)
does not state that you have to wear a shoulder belt (thus why she got
the ticket). The reply was the following:

"The words 'properly restrained' is the part of the code that pertains
to shoulder harnesses," Lt. Maryann Farmar, public affairs officer
with the CHP in Sacramento

The words "safety belt" would be interpreted by a police officer as
including both the lap belt and the shoulder harness if the vehicle is
equipped with one.

My defense is that the law does not define "properly restrained" as it
pertains to the position of the shoulder strap, thus the officer has
no right to enforce it.
However, the DMV may publish guidelines on this subject. Still, the fact that wearing only the lap belt and not the shoulder belt will avoid citation, but wearing the shoulder belt too loosely will allow citation does not seem like it is part of the law. I here defer to your experience and knowledge case law.

Actually, researching this ticket, I came across a few accident
attorney web sites that they state that you can be decapitated by
wearing your shoulder belt.

As far as pictures go, here is a couple I found during my search:

[url=http://www.ogrish.com/view_attachment.php?id=19165]LiveLeak.com - Redefining the Media[/url]
[url=http://www.ogrish.com/view_attachment.php?id=19164]LiveLeak.com - Redefining the Media[/url]


Finally, here's the information about the ticket:

Date: 05/22/11
Time: 2205
Day of Week: S

Infractions:
(Correctable Violation: Officer Checked “No”) CVC 27315(d)(1) - No Seatbelt
(Correctable Violation: Officer Checked “No”) CVC 16028(a) - No Insurance
Speed approx: 35
Speed Limit: 35
Direction of Travel: N
Location :Bascom * Hamilton / SJ / SCC
Comments: C, D, M

Badge #: 1895
Phone number to call indicated: 408 556 3000

[ferretkona]

Just pay the ticket.
You sound argumentative and probably gave the officer attitude.

[nzib]

Please, do not take the time and trouble to respond if you have no familiarity with the "trial by mail" system, believe that our authorities are infallible, or believe that "for your own good" is a perfectly reasonable justification for laws.

[ferretkona]

Newbees are always so right

[Fighter 1]

Originally Posted by nzib

Please, do not take the time and trouble to respond if you have no familiarity with the "trial by mail" system, believe that our authorities are infallible, or believe that "for your own good" is a perfectly reasonable justification for laws.

" Trial by Mail " response from the Commissioner that will hear the case will be "GUILTY" !!!!. now if you really want to fight this ticket and you have not been to an Arraignment hearing yet!, then look at the bottom of your ticket ! See where is say's c.p.c.853.9 and VH40513 and more numbers, well you need to take the time to read them because that where you will get this case against you dismissed .c.p.c. ( California Penal Code) 853.9 says that in lieu of a verified complaint the "NOTICE TO APPEAR" ( the ticket the cops gave you ) can be used as a verified complaint, or if you in writing wave you right to a verified complaint the court can move forward on the "NOTICE TO APPEAR". BUT if at your arraignment you may request that a "Verified Complaint be filed" and one will.

What you have to understand is that the cop can't "LEGALLY" give the court a verified complaint on a traffic ticket because there is no injured party , no injured party , no crime, no issue for the court to hear. But "YOU" have to appear in court and Demand this.

I have had many people all over the state of California use this and beat the ticket by their own law's.

Good luck! if you use your Trial by mail ("Trial by Declaration"). You have to remember , you sign the "NOTICE TO APPEAR" , your promise to appear on the date stated , if your not there they will file FTA ( failure to appear) on you and issue a warrant for your arrest.

[nr5667]

You realize the insurance violation is probably about 1,000 dollars of that ticket, right?

You shouldn't even be driving, I suspect there's a lot more to this story...

[nzib]

Yes, the insurance probably makes up the bulk of the fines. I have to submit proof of correction.
I do have insurance, though, through USAA.
It's paid out to April 2013.

I requested and was granted some kind of delay on the appearance by the county. I am not sure about the "verified complaint" thing.

"What you have to understand is that the cop can't "LEGALLY" give the court a verified complaint on a traffic ticket because there is no injured party , no injured party , no crime, no issue for the court to hear. But "YOU" have to appear in court and Demand this."

I will do a little more research and see. Thanks for the advice, though, exactly what I'm looking for.

[Fighter 1]

Originally Posted by nzib

Yes, the insurance probably makes up the bulk of the fines. I have to submit proof of correction.
I do have insurance, though, through USAA.
It's paid out to April 2013.

I requested and was granted some kind of delay on the appearance by the county. I am not sure about the "verified complaint" thing.

"What you have to understand is that the cop can't "LEGALLY" give the court a verified complaint on a traffic ticket because there is no injured party , no injured party , no crime, no issue for the court to hear. But "YOU" have to appear in court and Demand this."

I will do a little more research and see. Thanks for the advice, though, exactly what I'm looking for.

Go to the sites i stated and read them for your self !( California Penal code) c.p.c. 853.9 & Vehicle code 40513 then go into court and demand the document . Just remember that "NOTICE TO APPEAR" the cop gave you is not a "Verified complaint" even though the Judge ( Commissioner) will try to say it is. Also look at( California Penal code)c.p.c.740,It say's that "ALL" Infractions and Misdemeanor actions must be prosecuted through a "Verified Complaint". How can it be any clearer , the court need's a verified complaint to move forward with any action against you, in their own words and in their own Laws. Get educated in your rights before you go into court and try to fight the ticket , your going to get One chance. Read some of my other post on the same subject of tickets and Red light violations.

[Meowen]

go to court, plead not guilty. then you will get another court date. go again, state your argument; and you'll probably get out of it. You also have about a 50/50 chance the cop won't even show his face; in which case it will be dismissed by the judge.

[80skeys]

Originally Posted by nzib

When continued to reserve the right to not incriminate myself, the officer “detained” me in the back of the cruiser, continually prodding me for more information about my supposed misdeeds.

Delete the above sentence. Saying that you "reserve the right to not incriminate yourself" implies you may be aware you did something wrong. So don't mention it at all.

The door of my van was left open, hastily parked on the side of the road, while the officer threatened me with everything from a charge for reckless driving to taking me down to the station and towing the car.

Delete the above sentence. The words "hastily" and "threaten" are strong and imply antagonism. It's best to use as mild language as possible and not give the impression of antagonism.

The rest of it looks fine.

You also should explain the circumstances of why you were "head and shoulder" out the window and whether you had your seat belt on or not. Don't hide these facts. Just explain it.

It's best not to lecture the court on matters of law so don't bother bringing up case law.