How Long Are the Lines at LA Metro Courthouse? Well, How Far Do 9,000 People Stretch?
Worried about the lines in LA Traffic Court? Trying to figure out if you can go schedule a court date on your lunch break? Don’t even try in LA.
The Los Angeles Metropolitan Courthouse at 1945 South Hill Street might just be the busiest courthouse in the world. This downtown courthouse is the central clearing house for Los Angeles traffic court problems.
The majority of its visitors are there to schedule a traffic court date or enter a plea on a traffic court or misdemeanor charge.
On a normal day, 6,000 people will walk through the front doors of the courthouse and be screened by security. Then, the majority of those people walk straight to the traffic court clerks window to wait in a snake like line defined by retractable fabric barriers. Sometimes the wait exceeds two hours for a routine transaction.
Visit Traffic Court Pros.com. Free Attorney Case Reviews. Free Self Help.
And if you want to schedule a court date, get out your biggest calendar. Frequently, persons trying to schedule a court date to fight a ticket or citation are given court dates 6-8 months away.
In an effort to speed up the process, the court recently assigned several new judges to the task of clearing out old arraignments and lightening the case load of the traffic division. They are hoping to shave 3 weeks off of the wait before a court date can be heard by a hearing officer. But according to reports at the LA Times Blog, the hearing officers were not experienced judges, and some had as little as 2 hours of training.
In part due to the recent increase in arraignments after the new judges were added, last Monday the courts daily intake totaled a reported 9,000 people.
Often, the early morning lines at the LA Metro Courthouse will circle the building and extend down the local sidewalk. Drivers passing may may well mistake the scene for a parade, but it’s really just people waiting in line to see a court clerk.
The backlog can be blamed in part on inefficiencies that could be cured. Much of the business that is now currently done in person at the courthouse could be replaced with an online service according to one observer. “Why can’t we just set court dates on-line?”. And in some court, such as San Diego County, Attorneys can complete routine arraignments on misdemeanors by fax filing a simple form. See Misdemeanor Fax Arraignment Form San Diego County.
In LA County, they do not allow fax filing for even the simplest traffic court transaction, such as entering a not guilty plea.
Here are some tips for limiting wasted time at the LA Metropolitan Courthouse:
1. Hire an attorney to go for you. (Attorneys have priority because they are sworn, court officers and can get things done faster than a non lawyer);
2. Go in the afternoon if you can. The court clerks office is open until 4. Don’t expect to get a same day court date.
3. If you have to go in the morning, get there before 8 a.m.
4. Don’t look for free parking. There is none.
5. Make sure you ask for your paperwork, and don’t leave without it. You don’t want to have to go back in after you leave;
6. If you don’t have a legit defense, and are not committed to having a trial, you can avoid scheduling new traffic court dates by pleading no contest or guilty at any time.
-Christopher Dort, Esq.
Editor
Email: cdort@dortlaw.com
Need help with a traffic court problem, Suspended License, Failure to Appear or Warrant?
Traffic Court Pros.com can help! Get a Free Case Review (Click here)
Or research your issue with our Traffic Court Pros.com Custom Search:
Question about this article? Post a comment and we will try to respond with useful info.
Credit Repair
Improve Your Credit in 24 Hours
DUI Process: Clear Your DMV Record with an Expungement.
Police Now Have a New Reason to Pull You Over - Your Cell Phone.
Avoiding the police just got harder. The growing trend that allows police officers to stop and detain drivers for more and more reasons keeps on truckin. Beginning on July 1, 2008, Vehicle Code sections 23124 and 23123 take effect and add one more reason to the already long list of valid reasons for a police detention - talking on the cell phone while driving.
The new law allows the police to stop and detain motorists who are talking on the phone while driving if they are not using a hands free headset.
Previously, the police could not detain you for talking on the phone. Now they can.
Visit Traffic Court Pros.com. Free Attorney Case Reviews. Free self help.
The Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution requires a police officer to have a reasonable suspicion, based on facts, that a driver is committing an offense before there is a legal reason to stop and detain the driver. In general, this means the police must see a vehicle code violation before they stop a driver.
Talking on the phone without a headset is now a qualifying violation - a legal reason to be stopped.
Talking on the phone can also lead to a more intrusive investigation. Once the police stop a motorist, they are free to investigate whether or not the driver has a valid drivers license, whether or not the person has valid insurance, and whether or not the vehicle has current registration.
If the police notice signs of another offense during these routine inquiries, they may expand their investigation. For example, if they stop a person for talking on the cell phone, and then notice the distinct smell of an alcoholic beverage, they can start a DUI investigation.
So be careful with your cell phone use while driving. Vehicle Code sections 23124 and 23123 go into effect on July 1, 2008.
View the Department of Motor Vehicle Video on the subject.
The new law treats minors (persons under 18) differently than adults. In general, a minor may not talk on the phone while driving with or without a headset.
It is expected that this new law will make it easier for police to investigate DUI, driving on a suspended license, drug possession charges, mainly because stopping a suspicious motorist is now easier.
Insurance industry studies have concluded that driving while talking on a cell phone makes it more likely that a driver will cause a collision.
A violation of the new law does not cause a “negligent operator point” to be added to a drivers history report, but may be reported to insurance companies.
It may also be a basis for a negligence claim in civil court. For example, another expected side effect of the law is that personal injury attorneys representing auto accident victims will begin to use cell phone use as a basis for a negligence claim in civil court. According to an attorney source:
“If the new law prohibits talking on the cell while driving, and a driver injures a person while breaking that law, there will be a presumption that the driver was negligent, and therefore liable for damages. ”
The base fine for a first offense is $20, but this is a completely fake number. The real fine is generally 300% more than the base fine because the courthouse handling the citation will add penalty assessments, and court costs to the base fine. However, the fine is generally considered inconsequential compared to stress of being pulled over, and the hassle and trouble of dealing with the traffic court swamp.
-Christopher Dort, Esq.
Editor
Email: cdort@dortlaw.com
Need help with a traffic court problem, Suspended License, Failure to Appear or Warrant?
Traffic Court Pros.com can help! Get a Free Case Review (Click here)
Or research your issue with our Traffic Court Pros.com Custom Search:
Question about this article? Post a comment and we will try to respond with useful info.
Credit Repair
Improve Your Credit in 24 Hours
DUI Conviction Clean Up:
Clear Your DMV Record with an Expungement.
Top 10 Things You Should Never Say to a Cop
Everyone who gets pulled over by a police officer hopes the encounter will be short and friendly. But sometimes a police contact ends with the driver being packaged and shipped to jail, and then charged with a crime. It is no secret that things can go bad fast anytime someone with a loaded gun, and lots of armed friends, forces you to pull your car over on the side of the road.
Some unlucky drivers seem to have a special knack for making a police encounter worse than it has to be. Instead of using their right to remain silent, they dive deep into trouble by mindlessly saying something that either ruins any chance for a warning, or kills any defense to a criminal charge they might have.
Visit TrafficCourtPros.com.
Free Attorney Case Reviews, Free Self Help Info.
But this is good news for you! You can learn from someone elses past mistakes. To help out, we have compiled a list of actual statements real people have made to the police that you should never repeat. Here they are, with the reasons why they should not be uttered:
1. “I bought the weed from a stranger.” (it is not a crime to give away very small amounts of marijuana in CA. Buying or selling it is a crime)
2. “I’ll see you in court.” (causes the officer to write down detailed notes of the incident that he or she can use to refresh a memory and screw you in court)
3. “Everything in the car is mine.” (establishes possession of everything in the car, whether you knew it was there or not).
4. “I don’t know who owns the car. ” (creates probable cause for further investigation)
5. “I had a couple of drinks with dinner, but I’m sober.” (gives probable cause for a DUI investigation)
6. “My drivers license is suspended.” (lack of knowledge of the suspension is a defense)
7. “Yes, you have my permission to search.” (eliminates the need for probable cause to search, kills an illegal search defense)
8. “I was only driving home.” (never works)
9. “I hope you meet your quota.” (cops don’t have quotas, and this will just give them reason to add violations to your ticket)
10. “I’m sorry, but I just ran out of donuts.” (pisses cops off, motivates them to screw you)
Avoiding these common statements when pulled over can save you lots of money, and might just help you avoid an unnecessary conviction. Drive safely! Don’t drink and drive.
-Christopher Dort, Esq.
Editor
Email: cdort@dortlaw.com
Need help with a traffic court problem, Suspended License, Failure to Appear or Warrant?
Traffic Court Pros.com can help! Get a Free Case Review (Click here)
Or research your issue with our Traffic Court Pros.com Custom Search:
DUI Process: Credit Repair
Improve Your Credit in 24 Hours
Snoop Doggy Dogs Wife Arrested in Fullerton for DUI
Is any LA Highway Safe from drunk celebrities? The celebrity DUI phenomenon has just spread south from Malibu to Fullerton.
Ms. Snoop Doggy Dog, also known by the human name Shante Broadus, took one step closer to becoming a convicted criminal this weekend. She was arrested at about 12:15 Saturday for suspicion of driving under the influence of alcohol. Early information indicated she spent several hours in jail and was released on bail.
 Photo: Released by Fullerton Police Dept. |
Details about the arrest and stop are not yet known. However, it appears the investigating officer noticed objective signs of alcohol intoxication including a distinct smell of an alcoholic beverage, slurred speech, and impairment during field sobriety tests. |
Visit Traffic Court Pros.com. Free Attorney Case Reviews. Free Self Help.
Ms. Broadus is now expected to face criminal charges in the Orange County Superior Court and will have an arraignment within 30 days. Attorney sources report that she is likely to face 2 main misdemeanor charges: violations of Vehicle Code section 23152(a) and 23152(b). Either one can result in one year in the county jail.
Her booking photo indicates she was not happy with the arrest.
Shante’s BAC at the time of driving is not known at the time of this article. However, even if she had a low blood alcohol content, it may not be a defense.
According to one defense attorney: “There are usually 2 charges involved in a DUI case. One charge is for having a blood alcohol content of 0.08% or above, and the second charge if for driving while under the influence of alcohol - regardless of the BAC. Because of these two charges, the prosecutor can convict with evidence of a high BAC alone, or with a low BAC and signs of impairment. Either charge can result in a DUI conviction. It’s like taking two two shots at one duck.”
A conviction on either charge can bring upto one year in the county jail. However, in Orange County, most first offender DUI defendants spend only a few days in jail, and are put on probation with conditions including 10-15 days community service, substance abuse treatment, and a fine of $2000+ after fees.
The Doggy Dogg family has a history of facing, and beating criminal charges. Mr. Snoop Dog was previously arrested and tried for murder, but was acquitted by a jury. In other cases, he was convicted of reduced drug and weapons charges after long legal battles.
It is expected that Shante will put up a tough fight on this case as well.
-Christopher Dort, Esq.
Editor
Email: cdort@dortlaw.com
Need help with a traffic court problem, Suspended License, Failure to Appear or Warrant?
Traffic Court Pros.com can help! Get a Free Case Review (Click here)
Or research your issue with our Traffic Court Pros.com Custom Search:
DUI Process:
Clear Your DMV Record with an Expungement.
Question about this article? Post a comment and we will try to respond with useful info.
Credit Repair
Improve Your Credit in 24 Hours
Traffic Court Case Info Now On-line In Santa Clara, But Its Not Great.
Public Access to the Santa Clara County Courts just got a lot better. The Santa Clara Court recently made case information available on-line, and thereby joined the information age, finally! You now have free, public access to San Jose, Sunnyvale, and Palo Alto Traffic Court case information on-line.
Unfortunately, the access is not EZ, and not as useful as the on-line access to the Orange County Superior Court case information. Major limitations include confusing search options, and a separation of Criminal Case and Traffic Court Case information on the web.
Visit Traffic Court Pros.com. Free Attorney Case Reviews. Free Self Help.
Here are some useful tips on how to find Santa Clara county case and warrant information.
1. Choose an Index Search:
A person can search now for Traffic Court case information by using the defendant name, or case number on the Santa Clara County Superior Courts Web Site. But it’s confusing for the normal everyday person, because there are small, well hidden, options for “calendar search” or “index search”, and no explanation of what each means.
Here is the clarification the court leaves out: A Calendar Search is limited to recent entries on the courts calendar. This is the right place to look if you want to confirm a court date set for the current week. But, if you are looking for an old case, do not look in the calendar search.
An Index Search is the best way to find the complete record of a case by case number or defendant name and date of birth. This is the place to look for useful information on an old case.
Once you find a case through an index search, you will have a complete record of the case and can see what the charges are, the status of the case, and information on prior hearings.
2. You May Have to Check the Criminal Division Separately:
Be warned: the Santa Clara County Court has separate divisions for Traffic Court Cases and for Criminal Cases. These two divisions do not communicate well, and the on line case searches do not cover both divisions.
Generally, misdemeanors and felonies are handled in Criminal Division, and info on these cases can only be obtained from the criminal clerk (I mean criminal division clerk). Presently, you must call for information on Santa Clara County criminal cases. And calling the court clerk is not a fun experience, and not an efficient way to get things done.
Just yesterday, I (as an attorney) called the criminal division clerk to get a case number, and the court clerk very rudely told me the person had too many cases and she was not willing to look up the information - even though it was her job. Sadly, this is a common experience. We very much look forward to the day when court clerks are replaced by computers!
At any rate, the Traffic Division generally handles infraction cases and some misdemeanors, such as a failure to appear on a citation or ticket (vehicle Code section 40508a) and driving without a valid drivers license (Vehicle Code section 12500a).
There is some overlap between the Traffic and Criminal divisions. If you cannot find a case that you know is out there, check with both divisions. Do not just assume a case has disappeared if you cannot find it.
According to the courts web site, Criminal Case information will be available on line beginning on July 1, 2008, but it will require a separate search.
When compared with nothing, the new access to case info in the Santa Clara Court is a massive improvement. It makes an attorneys job easier, eliminates phone calls to rude and unhelpful clerks, and gives the public much greater access to public information.
As an attorney who deals with criminal and traffic court cases in many counties, I am often shocked at the drastic differences in how courts do business from one town to the next.
On line access to case info differs from county to county as well. When the Santa Clara access is compared to the on line access to case information in Orange County, Santa Clara is mediocre at best.
They are not alone, however. Other counties are just as bad or worse.
Los Angeles County’s access to case information is poor. You can find Traffic Court info, but no access to criminal case info. In fact, in Los Angeles, the court actually charges money for searching criminal case info by a defendants name - a true scam - and an obstacle the stops people from searching. Other courts provide info for free on line - LA charges for it and does not make it available on line.
And Eldorado’s County Courts access to case info is simply HORRIBLE! They do not allow on line or telephone access to case information.
It’s almost like Eldorado County believes case info is secret info, not public information. We all hope they wake up someday and realize it is in their best interest to give the public easy access to case info. (See Editors Note Below for Court’s response: They are updating their site 07/08)
Some counties provide on line access very, very well and deserve credit. Counties such as Riverside, Orange, and San Bernardino are far ahead in making it easy for everyday people.
For example, in the Orange County Superior Court, there is one EZ search option, and one search pulls up all cases for a person - including open cases, closed cases, traffic court cases, warrants and criminal cases. This fact gives Orange County courts the happy distinction of making it much easier for the everyday person to access the courts public records than other courts.
Perhaps they will keep working on it in Santa Clara? They made a good start.
Editors Note: Following the publication of this article, the El Dorado County Superior Court sent us the following new information:
”Thank you for the information provided in your article about the El Dorado Superior Court website. It is true we don’t currently offer some servicesother Courts provide on their sites. However, we are currently in the middle of a complete website overhaul. The new website is expected to “go-live” in July, 2008. This new site will have more tools to help the public and our justice partners find the information they need about the Court, and Court cases.
Some of the features include:
1. On-line case index
2. Daily Court Calendars
3. Jury Duty service
4. On-line payments
5. Tentative Rulings
At this point in time, we won’t have E-Filing available. That is something we will look into in the near future. Being a small Court, with limited resources, we are striving to provide the best service to our public that we can.”
-Christopher Dort, Esq.
Editor
Email: cdort@dortlaw.com
Need help with a traffic court problem, Suspended License, Failure to Appear or Warrant?
Traffic Court Pros.com can help! Get a Free Case Review (Click here)
Or research your issue with our Traffic Court Pros.com Custom Search:
DUI Process:
Clear Your DMV Record with an Expungement.
Question about this article? Post a comment and we will try to respond with useful info.
Credit Repair
Improve Your Credit in 24 Hours
DMV Hearings After a DUI Arrest: What You Need to Know
When a California driver is arrested for a violation of Vehicle Code section 23152, also known as a DUI, the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) will automatically suspended the persons drivers license. This DMV action is independent of any court action in a criminal case. Many people get confused on this point.
The DMV action against the driver is separate from the criminal case, and must be dealt with separately.
The automatic suspension action by the DMV is called an administrative per se suspension. Typically, the process goes like this: when the officer makes a DUI arrest, they confiscate the actual drivers license card. In exchange for taking this drivers license, the officer gives the recently arrested driver a DMV Suspension Advisement on a standard government looking DMV Form.
Visit Traffic Court Pros.com:
Free Attorney Case Reviews, Free Traffic Court Self Help.
The DMV form from the officer gives official notice that says the drivers license will be suspended within 30 days. The advisement serves as official notice of the drivers license suspension from the Department of Motor Vehicles. The 30 day period is required by law to give the driver time to take action against this automatic suspension. Everyone in this situation should read this form carefully.
DUI Process: Clear Your DUI Record by Expungement
Administrative Suspension Is Automatic
The DMV administrative per se suspension is based solely on the initial facts leading to the arrest. It does not depend on whether a driver is guilty or not. It’s all about the arrest. Because driving is a “privilege” and not a right, it can be taken away without a true showing of proof at this stage. However, to sustain the suspension against a challenge by the driver, there must be evidence that the driver was actually impaired at the time of driving upon a review.
If the driver wants to present his or her own evidence, or challenge the police version of the story in relation to their driving privilege, the driver must demand an appeal hearing from the Administrative per se suspension.
To demand a hearing a driver need only call the DMV driver safety office within the deadline.
There are ways to beat a DMV suspension after a DUI arrest. There may not be sufficient evidence to believe the person was impaired, there may be problems with the testing procedure, the cops may have made errors, etc. Sometimes the innocent are accused.
Because of this possibility, it is prudent to speak with an attorney about your case soon after your arrest. Waiting until your court date will result in the deadline passing, and an uncontested suspension.
10 Days To Request Appeal Hearing From DMV
A driver can challenge this automatic suspension, but they must take action within 10 days of the ARREST. Within this 10 day period, the driver (or an attorney for the driver), must request an appear hearing to challenge the per se suspension (See Vehicle Code section 13353.2(e).)
Hearings can be in person or ever the phone. The driver may present evidence, and can be represented by an attorney. The driver may call witnesses, including the officer, testing lab officials, and other witnesses by subpoena.
Usually, a telephone call or letter from the attorney is enough to get the hearing scheduled.. Once a hearing is scheduled, the DMV will pause the suspension until a decision on the hearing, and the drivers’ license becomes valid again.
This means that you can extend the amount of time before a suspension simply by requesting a hearing date. Often DMV is booked up for months, so it can be a long period that can help a driver make new arrangements if a suspension is inevitable.
Winning a DMV hearing after a DUI arrest is difficult. A former DMV hearing officer recently told me the winning percentage was roughly 17% when the driver was represented by an attorney.
If There Is No Conviction, More Work To Do.
Even if your DUI case is dismissed, your drivers license will remain suspended unless you request a hearing.
After an arrest, the prosecutor, normally a District Attorney (or City Attorney in some places) must file charges in the Superior Court to start a criminal DUI case. Sometimes, the prosecutor will decline to file these charges, because of evidence problems.
This happens often in borderline BAC cases such as 0.06% and lower. Sometimes with such a low BAC, there will be an arrest and then a DMV administrative per se suspension, but no charges filed because of the low BAC.
If a DUI case is not prosecuted after the arrest – for example the DA dismisses the case or does not file charges - then the law requires DMV to review the suspension and reinstate the license unless they find independent justification for the suspension. (See vehicle Code section 13353.2(e)).
The drivers license reinstatement after a dismissal or failure to file does not happen automatically. If a driver is arrested for a DUI, but charges are never filed by a prosecutor, the driver may need to notify the DMV on his or her own.
If no charges are filed, the deadline for a hearing increases to 1 year, so if you missed the 10 day deadline, you can make a late request. A letter to the DMV Driver Safety Office requesting a Vehicle Code section 13353.2 (e) hearing should get it scheduled.
At the Vehicle Code section 13353.2 (e) hearing you can present evidence that the case was not filed, etc.
If a defendant is acquitted at a trial of the charges, the DMV is required to release the suspension automatically.
If the DMV fails to grant a hearing, or a driver losing a DMV hearing appear, the driver can appeal the matter to the Superior Court via a “Writ of Mandamus” – otherwise know as a request for an order to get a state agency to do their duty.
-Christopher Dort, Esq.
Editor
Email: cdort@dortlaw.com
Need help with a traffic court problem, Suspended License, Failure to Appear or Warrant?
Traffic Court Pros.com can help! Get a Free Case Review (Click here)
For problems involving DUI arrest, warrants and suspensions in Los Angeles County, call or email Attorney Juan Lozano, Email lozanolaw@gmail.com
Or research your issue with our Traffic Court Pros.com Custom Search:
DUI Process:
Clear Your DMV Record with an Expungement.
Question about this article? Post a comment and we will try to respond with useful info.
Credit Repair
Improve Your Credit in 24 Hours
Drunk Driver Crashes Into Mexican Bicycle Race, Kills at Least 1. In CA, It Would Be Murder
Matamoros, Mexico (Monterey) - Life can change in a second. Something goes wrong, and you are dead, or facing life in prison. This past weekend, life did change for a group of elite cyclists in Mexico.
It happened when a short bike race of about 21 miles, called a Criterium, turned into a gruesome tragedy after 15 minutes when a 29 year old drove a large car straight through the front of the racing pack and ran over more than a dozen cyclists head on.
Visit Traffic Court Pros.com:
Free Attorney Case Reviews. Free Self Help Info.
Various reports of the incident indicate that driver, US resident Jesse Campos, was under the influence of drugs and alcohol at the time, and had fallen asleep at the wheel. He is quoted as saying he woke up when the accident happened.
At the time of the collision, about 18 cyclists had broken away from the main pack and were riding at about 25 mph on the right side of the road. They were escorted by a police cruiser, and were riding legally. They were all wearing helmets.
Campos’ car passed the police escort and hit the cyclists head on at about 20-30 mph. The helmets offered little protection against the momentum of the heavy 1980s American made car.
A photo of the collision is too graphic to show here, but illustrates cyclists flying through the air and crushed bicycles. Early reports of the incidents conflicted on the number of deaths,which were listed between 1 and 5. One of the dead was 30-year old Alejandro Alvarez of Brownsville, TX. About a dozen cyclists are being treated for severe injuries.
A passenger from the car, reported as Campos’ girlfriend, admitted the couple had been drinking all night at a beach party. One news station is reporting that Mexican officials confirm toxicology reports showed Campos was impaired.
In California, this driver would face life in prison. When a driver kills a person while driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol (in violation of vehicle code section 23152(a) or 23152(b)), they can be charged with second degree murder, and can face life in prison.
Driving under the influence of alcohol is considered prima facie evidence of “malice” - which means a reckless disregard for the safety of others. The law considers drunk driving to be the same recklessness and malice as shooting a loaded weapon into a crowd.
In California, a person can commit the crime of “drunk driving” in 2 ways:
1) driving with a blood alcohol content of 0.08% or higher (regardless of how well you drive); OR
2) driving under the influence of alcohol, regardless of the blood alcohol content (demonstrated by bad driving, such as a collision)
Thus it is possible to get convicted of a DUI even if your BAC is less than 0.08% if you cause a collision.
Here is our best advice: Do not make the mistake of thinking that a low blood alcohol content is safe. If something goes wrong, a BAC of 0.07% can potentially result in prison for life.
-Christopher Dort, Esq.
Editor
Email: cdort@dortlaw.com
Need help with a traffic court problem, Suspended License, Failure to Appear or Warrant?
Traffic Court Pros.com can help! Get a Free Case Review (Click here)
Or research your issue with our Traffic Court Pros.com Custom Search:
Credit Repair
Improve Your Credit in 24 Hours
Want to Complain About GC Services? Now You Can.
If you have had the unfortunate experience of getting a citation sent to the collection agency GC Services by a traffic court, you’ve probably experienced harassing phone calls, threatening letters, and false information as answers to your questions.
You are not alone, and now you can publish your complaints for others to review and share. A web site called the Complaints Board is now collecting complaints against GC Services. You can post a complaint or story for free at http://www.complaintsboard.com/complaints/gc-services-c43087.html.
Visit Traffic Court Pros.com; Free Attorney Case Reviews. Free Self Help.
Need help with a traffic court problem, Suspended License, Failure to Appear or Warrant?
Traffic Court Pros.com can help! Get a Free Case Review (Click here)
Or research your issue with our Traffic Court Pros.com Custom Search:
Credit Repair
Improve Your Credit in 24 Hours
Was Your Failure to Appear a Misdemeanor or an Infraction? Make Sure Your Get a Clear Record.
Some traffic court violations always start out in court as a Misdemeanor charge, but can be reduced to infractions by the court. In many failure to appear cases, it is not clear to traffic court defendants whether they were convicted of a misdemeanor, or the less serious Infraction version of a violation.
Sometimes, after the case is over, the Department of Motor Vehicles will get it wrong, and list the case as a misdemeanor conviction on a driver’s history report, when in fact it was not a misdemeanor. Getting a clear record of a case from the court when it ends can protect a driver from this messy problem.
Visit TrafficCourtPros.com
Free Attorney Case Reviews; Free Traffic Court Self Help Info
The details of the problem are these:
There is a big difference between a Misdemeanor Conviction and Infraction Violation. Misdemeanors are real crimes that have a maximum penalty of up to one year in the county jail. Misdemeanors show up on background and criminal records checks as criminal convictions.
Infractions are much less serious. They are not considered crimes, and carry only a fine as the maximum sentence. They do not appear on criminal records / pre employment screenings.
Some Vehicle Code violations, such as a failure to appear in court (Vehicle Code section 40508a), and driving without a valid license (Vehicle Code section 12500a) always start out as a misdemeanor charge, but can be reduced to an infraction by the court when a defendant pleads guilty or no contest.
Many traffic court commissioners and judges will routinely reduce a failure to appear charge under 40508a from a misdemeanor to an infraction if a defendant shows up in court voluntarily and resolves their case efficiently but pleading guilty or no contest.
When a misdemeanor failure to appear charge is reduced to an infraction by a traffic court, the penalty is generally a simple fine. The court’s record of the case is changed from a pending case with a Vehicle Code section 40508a Misdemeanor charge, to list a conviction of a Vehicle Code section 40508a “Infraction”. The case number and the vehicle code violation number (the statute) are the same, but the classification is very different than when the case started.
The court then notifies the DMV that the case is no longer pending, and ended as a conviction.
Somewhere along the line things can get mixed up. The California Department of Motor Vehicles does not always correctly document what happens in court. At TrafficCourtPros.com, we have noticed the DMV at times mislabels failure to appear convictions as misdemeanors, when they were reduced to infractions by the court.
Our theory (based on opinion) as to why it happens it that the court employees and DMV employees responsible for the communications do not understand the difference between a misdemeanor and infraction.
Because a failure to appear charge under Vehicle Code section 40508a always starts out as a misdemeanor, DMV gets notice of a misdemeanor failure to appear form the court and notes it on the drivers history record for the driver as misdemeanor.
If the driver is later convicted in court of a 40508a violation reduced to an infraction, the DMV gets notice of the conviction from the court, and changes the driver’s history record to reflect a 40508a conviction. But the bad news is they often fail to correct the listing from a “misdemeanor” to an “infraction” on the DMV record.
The result is that although there really was not a misdemeanor conviction in court, the DMV incorrectly lists the driver of having a misdemeanor 40508a conviction.
If the driver does not have proof that the court reduced the misdemeanor to an infraction, getting a misdemeanor conviction removed from DMV records can be a nightmare.
But if the driver gets a clear record of the conviction on a court abstract at the time the case ends, the problem can be cleared quickly. All the driver has to do is take the court abstract to a DMV office.
Unfortunately, a common and serious mistake made by people in traffic court is that they fail to clarify whether or not they are being convicted of an infraction or a misdemeanor while in court.
So her is our Newest Traffic Court Self Help Tip: If you are going to court on a failure to appear charge (40508a), get a clear record of the violations you are convicted of when the case is over. Keep copies of the paperwork in a safe place.
If you are not sure if you are being convicted of an infraction or a misdemeanor, ask the judge to clarify it. It’s your right to know for certain. Get proof and check to make sure DMV has it right. Contact the DMV Driver Safety Office near you for details on what they have listed on your record.
Blog Article Code
-Christopher Dort, Esq.
Editor
Email: cdort@dortlaw.com
Need help with a traffic court problem, Suspended License, Failure to Appear or Warrant?
Traffic Court Pros.com can help! Get a Free Case Review (Click here)
Or research your issue with our Traffic Court Pros.com Custom Search:
Credit Repair
Improve Your Credit in 24 Hours
Biased Judge Leads to Overturning of Failure to Appear Conviction in Santa Clara Court
A failure to appear conviction in Santa Clara County Superior Court was overturned last week by the California Court of Appeal. The rare reversal was the product of a trial in front of a biased judge that should have never taken place.
The appeal decision followed the trial of Defendant Salee Amina Mohammed, who was accused of missing a court appearance after being released from custody.
Her defense was that she had never signed a promise to appear in court on the day in question, and that the required elements of a conviction were not present. There was no evidence in the court record that she had promised to appear on the date in question.
Visit TrafficCourtPros.com
Free Case Attorney Case Reviews, Free Self Help.
Salee Mohamad believed she had a defense to the failure to appear allegation, and demanded a trial on the charge. At first, Salee tried to defend herself in the trial. But the judge, a former prosecutor and Deputy District Attorney, took over the trial with completely unfair manipulation of the trial in front of the jury.
Judge Joyce Allegro (Department 54) repeatedly chastised Mohamad and her defense, and led the jury to believe the judge was aligned with the prosecution.
The official court record showed the judge told Salee to “be quiet” more than 50 times. Further, Judge Allegro called the defendant “completely rude” and asked her at one point: “‘Do you want to be physically gagged? I can do that if I have to and I will if I have to.”
At one point, Judge Allegro herself objected to the defendants arguments as if she were still a prosecutor.
According to Attorney Christopher Dort, an attorney who handles failure to appear cases in Santa Clara:
“When a judge mindlessly objects to a defendant’s arguments, it is a clear showing that the judge views herself as a prosecutor, not as an impartial decision maker. This judge thinks she is still a prosecutor. When the jury sees that behavior, the jury believes the right thing to do is follow the judge’s lead.”
DUI Process:
Clear Your Drunk Driving Record.
Thereafter, the Judge Allegro prohibited Salee from continuing on as her own attorney, and appointed a public defender to finish the trial.
At the end of the trial, the prosecution had not produced enough evidence for a conviction, so Judge Allegro took the unusual and unfair action of allowing the prosecution to reopen its case, to try to shore up its evidence. Once that was done, Judge Allegro denied a defense effort to challenge the added evidence.
Get Credit Repair Today!
Improve Your Credit Score in 24 Hours
Finally, the jury convicted Salee of the failure to appear charge, and Judge Allegro sentenced her to 1 year in the county jail.
Salee’s court appointed defender then appealed the conviction on numerous grounds, including judicial misconduct.
Upon hearing the appeal, the 6th District Court of Appeal agreed that the conviction was illegal, and overturned the conviction.
The appeal court’s opinion, authored by Justice Franklin Elia, concluded that Judge Allegro had acted improperly when she refused to dismiss the charges against Mohammed, even though there was no evidence that the defendant knew she needed to appear. In essence, the appeals court ruled that there was not even enough evidence to send the case to trial to begin with.
Whats the moral of this story? Not all judges are fair. They can screw you if they want to. If you are fighting a failure to appear charge in Santa Clara County, disqualify Judge Joyce Allegro immediately. For information on how to disqualify a biased judge, see our blog article on the topic.
Download People v. Mohammed appeal decision (.doc)
Editor
Email: info@dortlaw.com
Need help with a traffic court problem, Suspended License, Failure to Appear or Warrant?
Traffic Court Pros.com can help! Get a Free Case Review (Click here)
Or research your issue with our Traffic Court Pros.com Custom Search:
Get Credit Repair Today!
Improve Your Credit Score in 24 Hours