Traffic Ticket Trial Question

[Adam_hadam]

I got a speeding back in the summer and decided to take it to trial. I got my trial date, its Nov. 22. I also received in the mail an affidavit from the officer that he is unable to appear at court that day for the trial and has requested a new trial date. I haven't been informed of a new trial date as yet.

The question is: Since no new date has been set, I go to court and plead "Not Guilty" and there is an excellent chance the ticket is thrown out. Am I on the right track here? Are things as good as they appear?

 

[fmahovalich]

You would have to argue why the Officer should not have an adjournment. He is asking for one in the affidavit, and will be granted one if you do not make a compelling argument that trial should go on. There has been no overlong delay so you cannot argue that. Perhaps u could argue the inconvenience of taking work off...or paying a lawyer..etc. and urge the Judge not to grant the adjournment.

no different than if you had sought an adjournment.....they are generally granted.

if I were you....I would speak to the prosecutor....suggesting you will plea to a ticket with NO points....otherwise you will a) fight the adjournment vigorously and b) take it to trial.

now...depends on the amount of speed as well!

 

[doggee_01]

You would have to argue why the Officer should not have an adjournment. He is asking for one in the affidavit, and will be granted one if you do not make a compelling argument that trial should go on. There has been no overlong delay so you cannot argue that. Perhaps u could argue the inconvenience of taking work off...or paying a lawyer..etc. and urge the Judge not to grant the adjournment.

no different than if you had sought an adjournment.....they are generally granted.

if I were you....I would speak to the prosecutor....suggesting you will plea to a ticket with NO points....otherwise you will a) fight the adjournment vigorously and b) take it to trial.

now...depends on the amount of speed as well!

what frank said!!

 

[GPIDEAL]

Can the OP argue down the road, assuming the trial is delayed further so that an 11(b) motion to stay the case can be made? Without appearing, can he simply send a notice to the trial that he's against an adjourment (you don't want to tip off the court so that they re-schedule sooner than later to thwart an 11(b) constitutional argument).

 

[afterhours]

I got a speeding back in the summer and decided to take it to trial. I got my trial date, its Nov. 22. I also received in the mail an affidavit from the officer that he is unable to appear at court that day for the trial and has requested a new trial date. I haven't been informed of a new trial date as yet.

The question is: Since no new date has been set, I go to court and plead "Not Guilty" and there is an excellent chance the ticket is thrown out. Am I on the right track here? Are things as good as they appear?

don't plead to anything, it should be thrown out

 

[buttercup]

I got a speeding back in the summer and decided to take it to trial. I got my trial date, its Nov. 22. I also received in the mail an affidavit from the officer that he is unable to appear at court that day for the trial and has requested a new trial date. I haven't been informed of a new trial date as yet.
The question is: Since no new date has been set, I go to court and plead "Not Guilty" and there is an excellent chance the ticket is thrown out. Am I on the right track here? Are things as good as they appear?

If you haven't been officially notified that the trial date has been changed, then the trial date remains Nov 22. If you still haven't been notified by 22 Nov, and you go and the PO doesn't turn up, you can ask for dismissal, and it should be granted.

If you receive your notification e.g Nov 21, you can argue that the notice was too short, and you're prepared, and you've lined up all your witnesses, and you're ready for trial, and adjournment would cause hardship, yada yada. If you ask for a dismissal in that case, you might get away with it.

It's (almost) certain that the court will grant the adjournment based on the police request. But until you are notified of the adjournment, (not necessarily notified of the new date) then the present date stands.


Anyway, who goes to trial to fight a speeding ticket? Simple speeding is an absolute liability offence. That means the prosecution does not have to prove any intent on your part. Simple proof (the PO's word) that you were over the speed limit is enough for the conviction. The court won't hear your argument that you didn't mean it, etc. You might have a case if the speed limit signs are the wrong size, or too high off the ground, or too far apart, etc. You might even have a case if you can prove a furniture van was obscuring the sign. Those things, if proved, establish that the speed limit did not exist, on that road at that time. You might have a case if you can show that the radar gun had not been calibrated or not checked, etc -- i.e the court cannot rely on the "proof" of the fact of speeding.

Or are you accused of stunt driving (50k over the posted speed limit)? The prosec does have to prove intent for that - so the court will listen to your reasons, excuses, etc. Mug's game, though, unless you have a really good case.

 

[dieyoung]

Delay. He's delaying the trial. 11.b is your friend.

 

[dieyoung]

You would have to argue why the Officer should not have an adjournment. He is asking for one in the affidavit, and will be granted one if you do not make a compelling argument that trial should go on. There has been no overlong delay so you cannot argue that. Perhaps u could argue the inconvenience of taking work off...or paying a lawyer..etc. and urge the Judge not to grant the adjournment.

no different than if you had sought an adjournment.....they are generally granted.

if I were you....I would speak to the prosecutor....suggesting you will plea to a ticket with NO points....otherwise you will a) fight the adjournment vigorously and b) take it to trial.

now...depends on the amount of speed as well!

No there is a huge different. If the Crown ask for one it works in your favor. If you ask for one is hurts your 11.b application. It is known that if the Crown decides to prosecute a case they should have no delays. If they are ready to rock- they need to rock.

 

[Adam_hadam]

Everybody, thank you for all of your thoughts on this matter.

 

[buttercup]

So - how did it go?

 

[black booty lover]

Whenever you get a speeding ticket, your best off just pleading not guilty. Before the trial even starts, they will offer you a plea of no points and reduce the fine. Accept it, say thank you very much and be on your way.

 

[Klute]

Your insurance rates go up everytime you plead guilty whether or not there were points. So best to have case thrown out then to accept a plea bargain.

Klute

 

[curiousandlooking]

I went to court to fight a seat belt ticket and they took everyone's plea ahead of time and let people get reduced amounts for "guilty with excuse".... but the best part was that everyone that was pleading not-guilty had to wait another 30 minutes at which time they told us that they had a time constraint with a larger case and they dismissed everyones charges.

Some times you just get lucky.

 

[Petzel]

Anyway, who goes to trial to fight a speeding ticket? Simple speeding is an absolute liability offence. That means the prosecution does not have to prove any intent on your part. Simple proof (the PO's word) that you were over the speed limit is enough for the conviction. The court won't hear your argument that you didn't mean it, etc. You might have a case if the speed limit signs are the wrong size, or too high off the ground, or too far apart, etc. You might even have a case if you can prove a furniture van was obscuring the sign. Those things, if proved, establish that the speed limit did not exist, on that road at that time. You might have a case if you can show that the radar gun had not been calibrated or not checked, etc -- i.e the court cannot rely on the "proof" of the fact of speeding.

Not so. I got a speeding ticket doing quite a bit over the limit which involved points and a big fine. I went to court and prior to my case, I spoke to the prosecutor and explained I had a perfect driving record. He checked that out and he agreed it would serve no purpose to tarnish a perfect driving record and offered me a much lesser fine with no points. I took the deal. So don't say it's not worthwhile fighting a speeding ticket, especially when you have a good driving record.

 

[buttercup]

Not so. I got a speeding ticket doing quite a bit over the limit which involved points and a big fine. I went to court and prior to my case, I spoke to the prosecutor and explained I had a perfect driving record. He checked that out and he agreed it would serve no purpose to tarnish a perfect driving record and offered me a much lesser fine with no points. I took the deal. So don't say it's not worthwhile fighting a speeding ticket, especially when you have a good driving record.

Absolutely, fight it before trial. My point was fighting a ticket like yours at trial is a mug's game.

But wait. You were "doing quite a bit over the limit", so you were subjecting the road-using public (including me) to undue risk. You should be in prison.

 

[Petzel]

Absolutely, fight it before trial. My point was fighting a ticket like yours at trial is a mug's game.

But wait. You were "doing quite a bit over the limit", so you were subjecting the road-using public (including me) to undue risk. You should be in prison.

There were no other cars on the road where I was at the time, so I wasn't paying attention to how fast I was going.

 

[Klute]

Not so. I got a speeding ticket doing quite a bit over the limit which involved points and a big fine. I went to court and prior to my case, I spoke to the prosecutor and explained I had a perfect driving record. He checked that out and he agreed it would serve no purpose to tarnish a perfect driving record and offered me a much lesser fine with no points. I took the deal. So don't say it's not worthwhile fighting a speeding ticket, especially when you have a good driving record.

Buddy,

You did not fight this ticket at trial. You took a deal before the trial. Which is exactly what buttercup said to do. Because it is too hard to win a speeding ticket at trial.

Klute

 

[richaceg]

Prosecutors have better things to do. If yo play hardball, it's not that they don't want to play hardball with you. They just don't want to waste their fucking time over a speeding ticket. Go on trial and make sure you show up if the date given is final. Most likely they will send a notice to move the date...(them playing tag with you.) Some people don't want to waste time on tickets and just go and pay the fines thinking no points (the sweet words that usually comes out of the prosecutors lips) thinking it won't affect insurance premium (when it does). Unless you like paying extra $$$ for insurance, fight it.

 

[Petzel]

Buddy,

You did not fight this ticket at trial. You took a deal before the trial. Which is exactly what buttercup said to do. Because it is too hard to win a speeding ticket at trial.

Klute

Ok, I said it badly.

 

[Mister K]

The real question is what did the OP - Adam_hadam - finally do?