I received a speeding ticket in Collin County, 54mph in a 40mph. My Sedan was Car #3, along side of me a Sedan (we were the 2nd wave of two cars, behind 2 cars ahead of us: an SUV and a Sedan). There was also an SUV behind me. Five cars total. This was recorded on video from his dashcam and I got a cell phone copy to study when I went home. On the ticket, the officer did not complete every area. He completed the weather condition, the street condition, all my name, address and vehicle information was listed in order. However; he left two areas blank and he cited me closer to him (around 335 ft away from his stationary vehicle), than where the Radar "locked in" 54 mph (around 650 - 700ft away). He definitely placed me in the wrong violation area (that is on the ticket - 335 ft away) and he did not complete RADAR CALIBRATED or DISTANCE. I was going to argue the violation location, and the distance and radar calibration areas for a defense. Is it possible that I have a chance to win the three arguments for lack of resolution (five vehicles RADAR bouncing off each other in one area 6-10 seconds apart), the incompletion of the DISTANCE where he should have started/ended Visually Estimating my speed and why the RADAR CALIBRATED area is totally BLANK? I'm all ears. Trial is 6-18-2015. HELP ;-))
-
Welcome to our legal community! Click here or the create new topic button to ask a question and receive answers and comments from our friendly and helpful legal community.
Articles that answer frequent legal questions are in our Law Guide. Important legal news is reported in The Law JournalYou can find a lawyer near you in the Lawyer Directory. If you know that you need to hire an attorney, you can submit a case review from a lawyer.
Speeding Ticket in Texas (Incomplete Information)
- Thread Starter ArnieHall
- Start date
army judge
Super Moderator
To even attempt to prove your suspicions, you'll need to hire a few experts.
You won't be allowed to testify about radar operations unless you hold an electronics engineering degree, or maybe hold a degree in physics, and the court certifies you as an expert.
Your ideas have been attempted by many, rarely successful, so why bother?
Take traffic school, or seek "deferred adjudication" if you want the citations to not post against your drivers license. No traffic court judge will ever allow what you're suggesting.
As far as any mistakes or omissions on the citation, the prosecutor will simply seek leave to amend and/or correct any errors.
You won't be allowed to testify about radar operations unless you hold an electronics engineering degree, or maybe hold a degree in physics, and the court certifies you as an expert.
Your ideas have been attempted by many, rarely successful, so why bother?
Take traffic school, or seek "deferred adjudication" if you want the citations to not post against your drivers license. No traffic court judge will ever allow what you're suggesting.
As far as any mistakes or omissions on the citation, the prosecutor will simply seek leave to amend and/or correct any errors.
Thank you for the information provided. Not what I wanted to hear, but duly noted. Two further questions. 1. I've asked for Discovery three times regarding the tuning fork calibration and the officer's citation log for the month of March 2015. Prosecutions has said they are not departing with information as it is not relevant to my citation. Should I file a motion to compel? 2. Should I file for a Continuance since the trial date is 6 days away?
army judge
Super Moderator
You can attempt to file any motion you can conceive.
Why bother?
Requesting the officer's citation log, assuming he maintains one (per se), not gonna happen.
The prosecutor is correct, but the judge makes the call.
Such a blanket request is akin to asking for the officer's notebook.
Only the dumbest and a few rookie officers even bring that notebook to court when the testify.
They know what can happen if they pull it out and ask to review their notes on the case, BEFORE answering your question.
You might be more successful in asking for a log of the citations issued by the officer, maintained by the agency for which he is employed.
That wouldn't likely be allowed by the judge either, for want of relevance.
Remember, this your trial, not the trial of other defendants in your jurisdiction.
You can appear and request a continuance, with a good reason.
If you and prosecutor agree, the request becomes pro forma.
You won't likely enjoy the outcome.
Small claims courts, traffic courts in Texas are the lowest courts in our state.
Some sitting jurists are Justices of the Peace (very few of whom are attorneys), others are Municipal court judges (most of whom sit part-time, others are egomaniacs that don't like to be challenged).
The simpler route, and the 100% successful route would be to take traffic school, or seek "deferred adjudication", assuming you don't want the citations to post against your drivers license.
You will not be allowed to subpoena the Police Department's manuals.
You may attempt to order a copy of the manuals from the equipment manufacturer.
You may request to subpoena the individual who issued any departmental or officer certifications.
One can request the subpoena be issued by the court.
The court won't help you gather names, addresses, phone numbers, etc...
Gathering all such information remains your responsibility.
Plus, you will have to fund the witnesses' travel and living expenses to appear in court to testify, unless the court allows them to testify by video-conference.
Many of those manufacturers and experts live on the west or east coast.
Even if you win, this will cost you far more than the citation fine and costs, and certainly more than traffic school or deferred adjudication.
Texas has no law requiring police officer to calibrate the radar (or LIDAR) device used in his or her cruiser.
Why?
The officer can't calibrate the device.
The device's antenna must calibrated regularly (I think annually by law or TECLOSE regulation, in some cases every six months by departmental policy).
That calibration is accomplished by having the antennas calibrated a certified lab.
Most people attempting to be Ben Matlock or Perry Mason use calibration improperly.
You want the PROOF, if you want to charge down this rat hole, indicating the last time the device was sent to the lab for calibration testing by laboratory engineers.
I've only given you the thumbnail approach.
It isn't as easy as I've made it seem.
There is much more to it.
I wanted you to know what you're about to attempt.
I used to defend these cases regularly. :yes:
I may have defended 2,000 (or more), and the money was easy.:yes:
Once the state allowed "traffic school", "deferred adjudications", and the area police agencies wised up, the "walking ATMS" dried up. LOL :blush
Obtaining subpoenas, having them served properly will only run up your costs.
The easy way, or the hard way, your call.
You might find these articles to be informative:
http://www.vmaxoutlaw.com/tech/speeding.PDF
http://criminal.lawyers.com/traffic-violations/defending-a-speeding-ticket.html
http://www.bluesheepdog.com/successful-traffic-court/
http://www.worldlawdirect.com/forum...-i-beat-my-ticket-texas-speeding-tickets.html
http://www.worldlawdirect.com/article/903/fighting-speeding-ticket.html
I wish you well. :bye:
Last edited:
Wow. What a load of information.
Thank you for all your wisdom. It truly helps me figure out which direction I need to take. I'm not a prideful person, so listening to your suggestions to take the least expensive way out is truly beneficial.
However; I just need to know a couple more answers (from your vantage point):
1. In January 2014, Texas enacted a law called the "Michael Morton Act" (Senate Bill 1611), that will require prosecutors to open their files to defendants and keep records of the evidence they disclose. Can this assist me in getting the prosecution to turn over records of calibration that might show (or not) "before and after every citation" which some case law supports: State of Connecticut v. Tomanelli (1966). In the case, which is the same year as the Honeycutt case, the Supreme Court of Connecticut ruled that "outside influences may affect the accuracy of the recording by a police radar set sufficient to raise a doubt as to the reliability of the speed recorded." The court also stated that tuning forks must be proved to be accurate to be accepted as valid tests of a radar unit. In order to establish the accuracy of the radar unit the operator must testify to the following: 1. That he made tuning fork tests before and after the defendant's speed was recorded. 2. That the tests were made by activating 40, 60 and 80 mph tuning fork and by observing that the unit responded correctly in each case.
and,
People of New York v. Perlman (1977). The Suffolk County District Court ruled that the radar device was not proved to be accurate since no external test had been performed before or after the arrest. This case is significant since it established the criteria of testing before and after a citation is issued.
2. I cell phone recorder (in the prosecutors office), my citation from the police dashcam that displayed the whole incident with the other four cars around my car. I even submitted to the prosecutor (at our 2nd Pre-Trial), frame by frame, second by second pictures of the time and speeds in each frame/second to support that the "RADAR" (not Lidar), picked up speeds from all sorts of activity between five vehicles (a total of 16 possible Radio Frequency Bounces off all vehicles). Will the judge allow me the opportunity to show those frame by frame, second by second pictures AS EVIDENCE - without the Prosecutor Objecting - and winning the objection (on possibly the way I was able to retain a copy of the dashcam video)?
3. Isn't it important for the officer to complete all sections of the citation and not leave out the areas that could support his RADAR (Distance/BLANK and Radar Calibrated/BLANK)? Does this not show an incompletion of duties on such an important report to gain funds from Radar Equipment?
4. Lastly, if the RADAR "Locked In" a 54mph speed at 660 - 700ft away from his stationary position, but his citation states that I was violating the speed limit at 335ft away from his stationary position, could that show the judge that a "Locked In" speed at 14:30:22 seconds (FIRE HYDRANT LOCATION - 660 ft AWAY) cannot correlate with a 14:03:30 second (VIOLATION LOCATION-335ft) timeframe that I actually entered into the portion of the street - REMEMBER, THIS IS ALL ON VIDEO (SECONDS AND FOOTAGE BASED ON A CITY AND GOOGLE MAP I RESEARCHED)?
Once again, thank you for your vantage point as I truly am anticipating your response as to: 'Do I have a better that 51% chance of victory or not"?
Thank you for all your wisdom. It truly helps me figure out which direction I need to take. I'm not a prideful person, so listening to your suggestions to take the least expensive way out is truly beneficial.
However; I just need to know a couple more answers (from your vantage point):
1. In January 2014, Texas enacted a law called the "Michael Morton Act" (Senate Bill 1611), that will require prosecutors to open their files to defendants and keep records of the evidence they disclose. Can this assist me in getting the prosecution to turn over records of calibration that might show (or not) "before and after every citation" which some case law supports: State of Connecticut v. Tomanelli (1966). In the case, which is the same year as the Honeycutt case, the Supreme Court of Connecticut ruled that "outside influences may affect the accuracy of the recording by a police radar set sufficient to raise a doubt as to the reliability of the speed recorded." The court also stated that tuning forks must be proved to be accurate to be accepted as valid tests of a radar unit. In order to establish the accuracy of the radar unit the operator must testify to the following: 1. That he made tuning fork tests before and after the defendant's speed was recorded. 2. That the tests were made by activating 40, 60 and 80 mph tuning fork and by observing that the unit responded correctly in each case.
and,
People of New York v. Perlman (1977). The Suffolk County District Court ruled that the radar device was not proved to be accurate since no external test had been performed before or after the arrest. This case is significant since it established the criteria of testing before and after a citation is issued.
2. I cell phone recorder (in the prosecutors office), my citation from the police dashcam that displayed the whole incident with the other four cars around my car. I even submitted to the prosecutor (at our 2nd Pre-Trial), frame by frame, second by second pictures of the time and speeds in each frame/second to support that the "RADAR" (not Lidar), picked up speeds from all sorts of activity between five vehicles (a total of 16 possible Radio Frequency Bounces off all vehicles). Will the judge allow me the opportunity to show those frame by frame, second by second pictures AS EVIDENCE - without the Prosecutor Objecting - and winning the objection (on possibly the way I was able to retain a copy of the dashcam video)?
3. Isn't it important for the officer to complete all sections of the citation and not leave out the areas that could support his RADAR (Distance/BLANK and Radar Calibrated/BLANK)? Does this not show an incompletion of duties on such an important report to gain funds from Radar Equipment?
4. Lastly, if the RADAR "Locked In" a 54mph speed at 660 - 700ft away from his stationary position, but his citation states that I was violating the speed limit at 335ft away from his stationary position, could that show the judge that a "Locked In" speed at 14:30:22 seconds (FIRE HYDRANT LOCATION - 660 ft AWAY) cannot correlate with a 14:03:30 second (VIOLATION LOCATION-335ft) timeframe that I actually entered into the portion of the street - REMEMBER, THIS IS ALL ON VIDEO (SECONDS AND FOOTAGE BASED ON A CITY AND GOOGLE MAP I RESEARCHED)?
Once again, thank you for your vantage point as I truly am anticipating your response as to: 'Do I have a better that 51% chance of victory or not"?
Correction:
...could that show the judge that a "Locked In" speed at 14:03:24 seconds (FIRE HYDRANT LOCATION - 660 ft AWAY) cannot correlate with a 14:03:30 second (VIOLATION LOCATION-335ft) timeframe...
Theere was a time error in the post. This is the correct timeframe (6 second difference from "Locked In" - 660 ft to Entering the Portion of the Street - 335ft away)
...could that show the judge that a "Locked In" speed at 14:03:24 seconds (FIRE HYDRANT LOCATION - 660 ft AWAY) cannot correlate with a 14:03:30 second (VIOLATION LOCATION-335ft) timeframe...
Theere was a time error in the post. This is the correct timeframe (6 second difference from "Locked In" - 660 ft to Entering the Portion of the Street - 335ft away)
army judge
Super Moderator
You're welcome. I enjoy a few challenging, or stimulating questions, and tend to dig deeper at times. :yes:
Okay, here's a link on the law you cited.
http://www.tdcaa.com/journal/dawn-new-discovery-rules
The legislative intent was to encourage discovery in criminal trials.
Those are trials at the county court and district court level.
Your case, especially in Collin County is at the JP Court level.
The major difference being your liberty isn't at risk of jail or prison time.
In addition, a CT or NY court precedent has no relevance in Texas traffic citation matter.
Most JPs aren't lawyers, and JP courts were created to promote judicial economy and to allow easy, economical access to justice for non-criminal (and lower level civil) matters.
You must also remember, the officer doesn't TEST the device per se.
The tuning fork, if used, simply stimulates the device to see if it is functioning correctly.
The officer would have no way of knowing if the device went "kaput" an hour after she or he began her patrol.
In addition, he or she wouldn't know if something interfered with the device reading properly at the precise time a violator was encountered.
That would also apply to you.
Last point, are you sure the officer was using a radar device, rather than LIDAR device?
This might be useful:
http://www.periheliondesign.com/downloads/speeding_ticket.pdf
http://forums.officer.com/t102024/
http://www.stealthveil.com/faq
http://www.stealthveil.com/guides/police-laser
.
.
.
.
.
.
What the judge decides is anyone's guess.
I can tell you that JPs and Muni Court judges aren't as tolerant of "motion this", or "motion that".
I rarely do it, and I know most of the judges within six counties of where I live.
I rarely have seen a prosecutor who won't object to a defense motion.
Your guess is as good as mine, as to what opposing counsel will or won't do.
You are always free to ask.
You are persistent, aren't you? :roflmao:
Any errors or omissions can simply be amended upon motion of the prosecutor.
I have never seen a prosecutor denied to amend any such errors.
The chief, the sheriff, and certainly the officer's supervisor might care about such errors, the court doesn't; unless it was in an attempt to "salt the mine", so to speak.
I've practiced law in the military and the the civilian world.
I'm certified to practice law in several states and before the federal bar.
I have served as a military trial judge, Muni court judge, and a district court judge.
I'm even a relief or assistant JP currently.
All of that not to brag or boast, but to say if someone tried to get me to rule on that, I'd deny it.
If you want that type of information brought in as evidence, you'd need an expert to do testify to your layman's analysis.
That is, assuming the judge would even allow that.
You can't just say stuff, unless you're testifying to something everyone would know, a fact such as: "it was raining", "it was a cold day", "it was a Thursday", "I heard the shots just as I started to watch the seven o'clock evening news", etc...
Once again. Thank you for your MOUNTAIN load of information. It is GR8LY appreciated (more than you know).
Yes - Guilty. I am persistent, but I am reasonable too. It appears that you have heard where I thought I could go in trial, and it appears from your summations that I have less than a 51% chance of victory. I'm okay hearing the truth too ;-))
With that being said, what are my chances of a lighter sentence if I go to trial (this Thursday coming up 6-18-2015) and Plead "No Contest"? I've already told the court I wanted to Plead Not Guilty. Is this possible or not at this phase? Secondly, should I extend the trial process by asking for a continuance in hopes the next set date, I plead "No Contest" and pray that the officer does not show up for a victory?
Curious ;-))
Yes - Guilty. I am persistent, but I am reasonable too. It appears that you have heard where I thought I could go in trial, and it appears from your summations that I have less than a 51% chance of victory. I'm okay hearing the truth too ;-))
With that being said, what are my chances of a lighter sentence if I go to trial (this Thursday coming up 6-18-2015) and Plead "No Contest"? I've already told the court I wanted to Plead Not Guilty. Is this possible or not at this phase? Secondly, should I extend the trial process by asking for a continuance in hopes the next set date, I plead "No Contest" and pray that the officer does not show up for a victory?
Curious ;-))
The Officer was using a Stalker DSR 2X Radar (not Lidar). They did send me the Operator's Manual on my first Discovery Request. Studied it completely and see several areas I thought I would attack. Tunigh fork is mentioned 61 times in the manual and calibration is mentioned 8 times in that same manual. The manual even states that the radar should be set to monitor at 660ft or further, as anything less will produce errors ;--)) It's right in their manual.
)Lastly; here is what the prosecutor emailed me 14 days ago (hence why I asked you - Can I possibly pleas "No Contest" - and what are my chances of SENTENCE?
ArnieHall:
Thank you for the photos and your questions about the radar's measurement of the speed of the vehicles seen in the patrol video. Officer ??? reviewed the patrol video and the still images. Officer ??? remains confident that your vehicle was the one that was speeding as measured by the radar. Officer ??? said the video and radar data displayed are consistent with his visual observations, the travel of all vehicles, and the radar's measurement of your vehicle's speed. At different points in the video recording, there are displays of the radar measuring the speed of other vehicles. At other points, the video displays the speed of your vehicle, including when your vehicle is catching up to the other vehicles. Officer ??? is able to explain in detail (and will be able to testify at trial better than I can explain it) how he knows your vehicle was the one that was speeding as indicated on the radar. I know it isn't the answer you were hoping for, but I wanted you to know that we discussed your concerns with the officer. His opinion has not changed, and we will not be dismissing the case. If you are interested in entering a plea of Guilty or No Contest, please let us know. Otherwise, we will see you at the next court setting.
Thank you!
ArnieHall:
Thank you for the photos and your questions about the radar's measurement of the speed of the vehicles seen in the patrol video. Officer ??? reviewed the patrol video and the still images. Officer ??? remains confident that your vehicle was the one that was speeding as measured by the radar. Officer ??? said the video and radar data displayed are consistent with his visual observations, the travel of all vehicles, and the radar's measurement of your vehicle's speed. At different points in the video recording, there are displays of the radar measuring the speed of other vehicles. At other points, the video displays the speed of your vehicle, including when your vehicle is catching up to the other vehicles. Officer ??? is able to explain in detail (and will be able to testify at trial better than I can explain it) how he knows your vehicle was the one that was speeding as indicated on the radar. I know it isn't the answer you were hoping for, but I wanted you to know that we discussed your concerns with the officer. His opinion has not changed, and we will not be dismissing the case. If you are interested in entering a plea of Guilty or No Contest, please let us know. Otherwise, we will see you at the next court setting.
Thank you!
army judge
Super Moderator
Okay, by now I'm sure you've read what is posted on the court's website.
In case you've missed something, here it is again for JP courts:
http://www.co.collin.tx.us/justices_peace/Pages/tickets.aspx
You certainly can change your plea at this point.
You could plead guilty, or "nolo", which is just another way to deceive the unsuspecting into pleading guilty. LOL
But, "deferred adjudication" is available, if you ask.
Its like asking for something special that those not looped in won't know how to ask, or the "secret" menu for In N Out Burger LOL :
http://www.in-n-out.com/menu/not-so-secret-menu.aspx
Okay, "deferred adjudication" works without fail, and you won't need to waste six hours doing teh "online traffic school" - which works and is the cheapest option.
In Collin County, what I term "deferred adjudication", its called "deferred disposition".
If you qualify, most people do, its a no brainer.
If not, "online traffic school".
My personal preference is "deferred adjudication" or "deferred disposition".
They work without fail.
Traffic school is limited to once a year, while "deferred adjudication" or "deferred disposition" can be used four times a year.
But, Collin County has a six month rule before the citation is dismissed.
That makes it available to you twice a year, plus traffic school.
Alas, as usual, I suggest to all, "just don't break their laws".
I always drive at least 10 miles below any posted speed limit, even though I need not worry about tickets as most officers in my neck of the woods know my vehicles and recognize me. LOL
In case you've missed something, here it is again for JP courts:
http://www.co.collin.tx.us/justices_peace/Pages/tickets.aspx
You certainly can change your plea at this point.
You could plead guilty, or "nolo", which is just another way to deceive the unsuspecting into pleading guilty. LOL
But, "deferred adjudication" is available, if you ask.
Its like asking for something special that those not looped in won't know how to ask, or the "secret" menu for In N Out Burger LOL :
http://www.in-n-out.com/menu/not-so-secret-menu.aspx
Okay, "deferred adjudication" works without fail, and you won't need to waste six hours doing teh "online traffic school" - which works and is the cheapest option.
In Collin County, what I term "deferred adjudication", its called "deferred disposition".
If you qualify, most people do, its a no brainer.
If not, "online traffic school".
My personal preference is "deferred adjudication" or "deferred disposition".
They work without fail.
Traffic school is limited to once a year, while "deferred adjudication" or "deferred disposition" can be used four times a year.
But, Collin County has a six month rule before the citation is dismissed.
That makes it available to you twice a year, plus traffic school.
Alas, as usual, I suggest to all, "just don't break their laws".
I always drive at least 10 miles below any posted speed limit, even though I need not worry about tickets as most officers in my neck of the woods know my vehicles and recognize me. LOL
Well. Ok, Ok, Ok. You win ;-))
Here is my (YOUR) decision:
Deferred adjudication, or Deferred disposition.
Any suggestions on how to crawl and ask for this FAVOR from the Prosecutor?
Email, telephone call or wait until court (Thursday, June 18, 2015)?
Should I take flowers or candy ;-))
Thank you for all your help.
ArnieHall
Here is my (YOUR) decision:
Deferred adjudication, or Deferred disposition.
Any suggestions on how to crawl and ask for this FAVOR from the Prosecutor?
Email, telephone call or wait until court (Thursday, June 18, 2015)?
Should I take flowers or candy ;-))
Thank you for all your help.
ArnieHall
army judge
Super Moderator
No worries, you are the winner here, my friend.
This will disappear after you make your plea, and pay your money.
Then, for the next six months, don't get any more citations.
There is a way around that, but you want to avoid using the "nuclear" option. LOL
You appear before the court and ask prior to the trial.
In fact, you should be able to accomplish the entire deal on Monday.
Call the court on Monday, ask the clerk if its possible to change your plea to "deferred disposition"?
That'll save you a trip, if you have to do it in court before trail.
If possible, scurry on down there (obeying their traffic laws, for goodness sakes LMFAO) and complete a document, sign, pay and go.
Here's the form you can complete and take with you on Monday, or whenever you decide to go:
http://www.co.collin.tx.us/justices_peace/Documents/application_for_deferred.pdf
You can choose "no contest" or "guilty", won't matter in your case, as you weren't in an accident.
Besides, its all going to be washed away, and you'll be a pure, virgin, driver once more. LOL
Now, go forth and offend no more, citizen of the Republic of Texas. LOL
Consider it done ;-))
This was a BLAST and so much FUN learning what ills and wills are lurking in the LEGAL WORLD.
This is the BEST bad news I've received in a few weeks, months, years ;-))
Please continue doing the good work you do. You've made me a believer that people can offer their WISDOM without monetary obligations. I think I will follow your steps and offer my expertise to others lacking knowledge in my field of Business.
Thank you once again, and may God continue to BLESS you - REAL GOOD ;-))
This was a BLAST and so much FUN learning what ills and wills are lurking in the LEGAL WORLD.
This is the BEST bad news I've received in a few weeks, months, years ;-))
Please continue doing the good work you do. You've made me a believer that people can offer their WISDOM without monetary obligations. I think I will follow your steps and offer my expertise to others lacking knowledge in my field of Business.
Thank you once again, and may God continue to BLESS you - REAL GOOD ;-))
army judge
Super Moderator
My friend, this is why I do this, because God has blessed me and our entire family.
Even if it weren't so, doing good work in His precious name is nothing, compared to what awaits for all eternity.
I can only imagine.
God bless.
Well - Here is my update on what I did today. I went to municipal court to request Deferred Disposition, and they said with this second phase of where I am in the trial process, I must request that from the judge or prosecutor. I then sent this request to the prosecutor and here is what i received back. Urrrgggghhhh
My request:
Good afternoon _____ (prosecutor): I would like to request Deferred Disposition for my Citation #E76229-10. Please take into consideration my past six year driving history, but more importantly, my last 98 days of driving without any citations. With this in mind, will you please consider time served. Thank you in advance, ArnieHall
Her response:
ArnieHall: Because the case is set for Thursday trial, changing your plea to request DD would have to be approved by the Judge handling trials on that day. I will check with Judge ??? to see if he would approve DD. You cannot receive "time served" on a Class C Misdemeanor. The only way to receive credit for "time served" is for a Defendant to be convicted, sentenced to a fine, fail to pay the fine, be arrested on a warrant, and receive credit toward the fine for time served in jail. I am assuming that you are not requesting to serve time in jail to satisfy the fine and court costs. I will let you know what ??? says about your request to change your plea and receive DD. Thank you for letting us know your request in advance of the trial date.
What might that mean sir?
ArnieHall
My request:
Good afternoon _____ (prosecutor): I would like to request Deferred Disposition for my Citation #E76229-10. Please take into consideration my past six year driving history, but more importantly, my last 98 days of driving without any citations. With this in mind, will you please consider time served. Thank you in advance, ArnieHall
Her response:
ArnieHall: Because the case is set for Thursday trial, changing your plea to request DD would have to be approved by the Judge handling trials on that day. I will check with Judge ??? to see if he would approve DD. You cannot receive "time served" on a Class C Misdemeanor. The only way to receive credit for "time served" is for a Defendant to be convicted, sentenced to a fine, fail to pay the fine, be arrested on a warrant, and receive credit toward the fine for time served in jail. I am assuming that you are not requesting to serve time in jail to satisfy the fine and court costs. I will let you know what ??? says about your request to change your plea and receive DD. Thank you for letting us know your request in advance of the trial date.
What might that mean sir?
ArnieHall
army judge
Super Moderator
I take it to mean you had a citation 98 days ago.
You're overplaying your hand, my friend.
Less is more, you didn't need to do anything but request DD.
Did you receive a citation 98 days ago?
No problem if you did, because you still qualify as long as you took care of it.
army judge
Super Moderator
You are not disqualified.
The other ticket wouldn't keep you from getting DD.
Don't take this in a negative way, but try to say as little as possible.
All you want is DD.
Don't volunteer any extra information, but always answer their questions honestly.
Your 98 odd days of being ticket free can't be counted against the six months of "no tickets" required to have the citation dismissed.
You'll get the DD, and you'll complete it successfully.
Remember, don't break their laws.
I say that every time I get behind the wheel, and reinforce it during my drive, or other activity. LOL
It keeps me out of trouble with "them". LMFAO
Share this page
