jkozlow3

Ok, 2 weeks after getting my new TL-S I get busted doing 79 in a 60!! Should I waive the ticket or try to fight it? I was clocked just before my exit on a fairly conjested freeway, so I could say that I was trying to pass some cars in order to get over and not miss the exit (that's what I told the unsympathetic cop). What do you guys think - fight it or pay it?

Turboara

Is there any plea bargaining in your area? In some areas (not NYC) you can plea bargain with the DA to reduce the points on your license but plead guilty for the fine & penalty. I'd do whatever it took to keep points off my license.. points will lead to higher insurance rates.

jkozlow3

I never heard of that, so I doubt anything like that is available here. I'll ask around though.

This will make 8 points

FKNA

To pass does not give one the right to speed, so that would be a lousy defense. I don't know how things are in your state, but in Texas you can take defense driving every 18 months for tickets like this.

AcidHorse

I don't know... that's a lousy excuse. Come to think of it, don't you think the court has heard all of the excuses in the world for people to get out of their tickets?

My advice for you is either pay for the ticket, take defensive driving or let lawyer handle it for you.

jkozlow3

What if the cop doesn't show up to court? The ticket gets thrown out, right? That's what I always heard.

Now let's say the cop does show up to court and I plead guilty/no contest. How much more $$ will I be paying with court costs and all than if I had just paid the ticket from the start?

It might be worth it to go to court just to see if the cop doesn't show. What do you guys think?

busterkw

My friend is a cop and he says that most cops will show up to the court because they get paid overtime for it.

I've had friends that have tried to say they were passing a car and thats why they were speeding. It never works, because just by saying that you already admit to speeding. A judge could argue that you could always slow down and go behind the car. just my opinion though.

vandy786

Does doing 19 MPH over the speed limit really cost 8 points on your record? I got pulled over for 16MPH over the speed limit recently so I was just wondering.

jkozlow3

No, No. Sorry for the confusion. I meant today's ticket will put me at 8 points (I already have 6).

I appreciate everyone's suggestions. Keep 'em coming. I'd love to get out of this if there's a way.

DMan

Almost everyone I know that went to court won, because the cop didn't show. Out of about 6 times, only once did cop show. My friend pled guilty, and had to pay the fine. Court costs were included in the ticket.

FKNA

Cop NOT showing up? That depends greatly on where you live. Let me tell you how things used to work here in Houston. I'd get a ticket, I'd go down for my arraignment and they would ask how I plead. I would say NOT GUILTY and that I want a trial by jury. Every time I did that, they dismissed it right then and there. Because they knew as well as I that the cop wouldn't show up. Key words I used was "used to". I wouldn't try that these days in Houston because cops get reprimanded if they don't show up. So it's usually a cold day in hell if they don't show up.

So if you live a city where most of the time cops don't show up, then by all means...request a trial.

pianoman41

Every state is different in how they handle tickets. In MA, a simple speeding citation, regardless of how high the speed, is considered a civil motor vehicle infraction. Because it is a civil infraction, it does not follow the same court procedures as a criminal matter. There is no trial option, period. You may contest the citation and have a hearing scheduled in front of a court clerk magistrate to determine whether you are responsible/not responsible. At this level, the citing officer does *not* have to show up to court. Any officer of the department may come to represent the Commonwealth (one has to show but it can be anyone).

If you are found responsible by the clerk magistrate, you can appeal the finding to a judge. In this second hearing, the citing officer *must* be present and the judge of the district trial court hears the matter. If you are found responsible by the judge, you *must* pay the ticket. There is no further appeal. The only good thing is even after two appeals, the most you can be found responsible for (money-wise) is the original fine on the ticket. They cannot add court costs or increase the penalty. The judge and/or magistrate can reduce the amount of the fine on a case by case basis.

Note that in MA there also isn't any "traffic school" or other program that you can attend to help reduce a fine or otherwise waive a citation. Civil infractions are either responsible (pay the fine and eat the points on your insurance) or not responsible (like it never happend).

Now criminal motor vehicle infractions are a whole different ballgame.

GotVTEC

I'm in KC, and this is a good explaination of what happens here...

"In the Kansas City metropolitan area, just about any first or second speeding ticket in a year's time, can be amended, with the help of an attorney, without the necessity of you appearing in front of a judge.

There are a few municipal courts in Kansas that have a "Citizen's Plea Docket" where you can amend your own speeding ticket with a Court appearance.

Find the phone number on your ticket for the Clerk of Court, call the number and ask Clerk if they have a "Citizen's plea docket". Tell the them you want to amend your ticket. The Clerk will tell you if you need an attorney or not. However, in most Missouri courts, you need an attorney to negotiate the plea for you.

For my clients, I make the Court appearance for them, so they don't have to. In most cases, I can get your speeding ticket amended to a no point, non-moving violation of driving with defective equipment, which, traditionally, is not reported to the Department of Revenue, and your driving record remains clean."

It's expensive because you have to pay for the attorney + the fine, but no points on my record yet! Knock on wood!

chrism7855

Just go to court and see if the cop shows up. if the cop shows up say you want to take traffic school for it. Ive only seen a cop show up once with my tickets... so when i saw he had shown up, i just told the judge i had a change of mind and didn't want to waste anymore of the courts time and would like to take traffic school for it. But if the cop doesn't show.... which in my experience they haven't... the judge doesn't even bother, he just dismisses it.

CH-TLS

Ouch, you're looking at high risk insurance if you get to 8 pts - I'd talkt to a traffic lawyer and see if there's anything you can do to get out of it.

Where did you get nailed?

bloo_tls02

In your case, i would fight it. i know around here, if you go to court the cop might pull you over before the hearing and try and work something out (like paying the full fine w/o points). I went thru that when i was doing 50+ in a 35.
The fine sure does beat a hike in your insurance...

FKNA

pianoman....I have to disagree, doesn't matter what state you live in you should be afforded a trial by jury. That's in our Constitution. Here in Texas a ticket is considered a criminal matter either. All that means is instead of a jury trial of 12 you get a jury trial of 6. Today I'll try to find specific statutes for your state that backs up my claim and/or back up your claim, whatever the case may be.

jkozlow3

On I-271 heading South just before the Rockside Rd. exit in Bedford Heights.

pianoman41

The Constitution only guarantees trials for *criminal* matters. In MA, many motor vehicle violations are considered *civil* infractions. Civil matters are handled completely different and Constitutional provisions (and protections) do not apply. This includes right to have a court-appointed attorney, which you cannot get for a civil matter, and protection from self-incrimination (normally protected by 5th amendment). When a decision is adjudicated for a civil infraction, you are found either "responsible" or "not responsible." You are not "guilty" or "not guilty" and as such you do not gain a criminal record for having been found responsible for a civil infraction, like a speeding citation. Only when a criminal offense is included on the same citation as the civil offense do the Constitutional provisions and protections kick in, and then the entire matter is treated as criminal.

Likewise, for criminal matters in MA if your case is not deemed serious enough to be bound over to the superior court of a county (usually grand jury indictment required, but not always), then you stay in district court and only get a trial by a jury of six. Only superior court has trial by jury of twelve.

So as I stated before, in MA it is impossible (written into the State legislation) to get a trial of any kind (jury, bench) for a civil only matter. The most you get is a hearing in front of a court clerk magistrate and a judge if you appeal at both steps.

FKNA

U.S. Constitution: Seveth Admendment
Seventh Admendment - Civil Trials

In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

As you see, our Constitution does guarantee trial by jury in *civil* matters.

I'm still looking for the specific statutes for MA that gives one the right to a jury trial in civil matters (specifically traffic infractions)

FKNA

Pianoman....I concede. I'm tired of looking. Never did find specific statutes, but this is what I came up with. In 1820 MA adopted the Constitution of Maine, in which that gave people the right to a jury trial in civil matters. It appears that right was repealed in 1953. And in regards to the 7th ammendment, it appears one is only granted a jury trial if punishment can be 6 months or more.

pianoman41

Here is a link to the specific MA law governing disposition of motor vehicle citations (M.G.L. Chapter 90, section 3: Disposition of Motor Vehicle Offenses):

http://www.state.ma.us/legis/laws/mgl/90C-3.htm

It's too long to post the whole thing, although all you MA residents should take the time to read it. I've copied the section below out of the law [subsection 4(A)]:

"If the hearing is conducted by a magistrate other than a justice, either the violator or the police agency concerned may appeal the decision of the magistrate to a justice, who shall hear the case de novo. There shall be no right of jury trial for civil motor vehicle infractions."

The 7th Amendment you've quoted above governs civil suits for torts (such as when OJ got sued after being found not guilty for the murders). It has nothing to do with violations of the law that are handled as civil matters by a state goverment, which, if their state constitution provides for, they are allowed to do.

Hope this clears it up.

ferizzo

I haven't read the rest of the posts but I would say fight it. If you have a clean record they might throw it out the window or reduce it. When I got tagged for the first time going 74 in a 65 I fought it and got it thrown out. I told them that I was only speeding for a few seconds to pass someone and apologized. I got a slight tongue lashing along the lines of "it doesn't matter, speeding is speeding" but then they throw out the ticket...I guess cuz I was honest and not trying to BS my way out.

CH-TLS

Bummer - that's a pretty notorious zone for the locals "increasing their city revenues", er, I meant "serving and protecting"

Do we have a traffic school in OH like they have in CA? - that way you could ditch a couple points and stay off High Risk insurance.

Good Luck

tdoh

Like others have stated, how a traffic infraction is handled in court varies from state to state, and perhaps even from county to county. Sure, the Constitution may state that you have a right to be entitled to a jury trial but that doesn't mean that such a right is absolute. I am pretty sure that legislation exists that allows states to set their own rules and guidelines on how to classify and handle cases, civil or criminal.

In California, when you are cited or charged with a violation of law, it is generally classified as an infraction, misdemeanor, or felony. The majority of traffic citations, like speeding or running a stop sign, are classified as infractions. If drugs or alcohol are involved, then it could get bumped up to a misdemeanor. And if you wind up killing someone while drunk behind the wheel it could become a felony. As such, California legislation is written so that any infraction is not entitled to rights normally allowed for misdemeanor or felony matters, i.e., no jury trial, no court-appointed attorney, no attorney allowed to argue or present your case on your behalf. Again, I must stress that my example is for California; YMMV.

As far as using the seventh Amendment as an argument for requesting a jury trial for traffic matters--consider this example: the second Amendment gives people the right to keep and bear arms; does that apply to convicted felons, too? I think we all know the answer to that...

Tony

chrism7855

ummm... is this Acura TL-s Law School?