As Americans we have the right to due process, and a fair trial, however traffic court really isn't a fair trial. Basically ones only hope of winning is if the officer doesn't show up. A police officer's word is sufficent to "convict" a person, because they are held to a higher ethical standard.
If you plea guilty you pay the fine and court costs and get a ticket on your record, which can effect your insurance rates. If you plea not guilty and win, you stil end up paying the court costs.
So, short of the officer not showing up, your only shot is to plea no contest, pay the court costs and ask that the ticket be deffered on the condition you aren't cited in a given time period.
Technically, you have the right to a lawyer, but bringing a lawyer will do more harm than good, the logic is if you can afford the lawyer you can afford the fine, or it will piss off the judge how's that fair. Just something I was pondering when I went to court with my sister for her first ticket.
2007-08-20 09:49:08 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Well let me say I share your frustration while disagreeing with you on some points. I was in traffic court today to argue against a stop sign citation. The officer did show up and openly lied in court, which since I am unable to prove he has no liability for freely engaging in perjury. Yes, I think it's a violation of rights to assume an officer conducts himself lawfully while a citizen is in a position to have to prove their innocence, rather than establishing a reasonable doubt.
I by the way live in the city of Hobbs, New Mexico (pop. 28,000) so if your driving through have a handheld tape recorder with you (I will from now on) because the officer just might lie in front of the judge.
Anyway, having a perfect driving record and arguing to the best of my ability got me a 60 day defer ed sentence (after 60 days if there are no other violations it's dismissed). I am of course just waiting for the squad cars to hover around me when I leave the house but we will see.
I did not have to pay any court costs or fines but I do know that different places have different rules, that I think should be uniform at least within the state (but alas to hope for democracy based on individual rights)
Michael John Weaver, M.S.
2007-08-20 10:25:27 · answer #1 · answered by psiexploration 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not all traffic courts function under the same rules. I've seen some courts where the defendant pays court costs even if the ticket is dismissed. And many judges will simply accept the officer's word over that of a citizen. But it is not the same everywhere. Often it is possible to win the case and most courts do not make innocent people pay court costs. I have to wonder where you went to court. Some small town's make a racket out of traffic tickets and you have no hope of winning against the corruption. Shenandoah, TX is a prime example. But an honest judge will here you out and make an honest decision based on the facts of the case.
2007-08-20 10:09:20 · answer #2 · answered by James L 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Well, if your sister was not driving properly then she deserves the ticket and the fines that come with it. This is a fair process. Since you do have the right to a lawyer, its your choice to have one or not. Also, you can dispute a ticket and the officer is not always corect and you will not always loose. The point is, the system is not flawed in this matter... bad drivers are the reason why there is traffic court to begin with. Pay the fine and get over it. Good luck hun.
2007-08-20 10:08:26 · answer #3 · answered by shadowsthathunt 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
My boss, a lawyer, defends traffic tickets all the time and gets his clients off (not all the time). So I don't know where you are getting that.
If you can produce evidence to the contrary you have a shot. If you are guilty don't waste our money and fight it and obey the rules from now on.
Also you can appeal a traffic ticket conviction so due process is in full effect here.
2007-08-20 09:53:52 · answer #4 · answered by elysialaw 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You obviously have no idea what you are talking about. And you probably drive like a moron or you wouldn't be worried about.
Take a ticket to court, argue with the officer's dash-cam, radar, speedometer. Do you think the officer likes standing in court? Do you figure he gets a kick out of writing a ticket to some dumb azz like you and then hearing you whine about it in court.
Either stand up for yourself if you are innocent or don't do the time if you can't do the time.
2007-08-20 10:00:52 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
The Officer must convince the court beyond a reasonable doubt that you committed the violation. If the Officer observed a green light on the cross street with the street you were on then it is reasonable to believe your light was red. The Officer will also be able to testify to anything you said and will probably also be asked if he/she knew the if the light was functioning properly the day the ticket was issued. It will be up to the judge to determine your guilty or innocence.
2016-05-18 02:04:06 · answer #6 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Pretty much all courts are like that to some extent. And traffic tickets are usually civil cases, meaning constitutional protections don't apply.
2007-08-20 10:35:54 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Technically, the constitution only guarantees access to a trial in criminal cases. Civil court is not criminal court, so by law they don't have to give you a trial. Most states provide access to trials in civil matters above a certain dollar amount.
Source: Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
2007-08-20 09:59:34 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Simply not true. There are lots of lawyers who make a living beating traffic tickets.
If you win, you pay your lawyer, not court costs. Whoever told you that the winner pays court costs was blowing smoke up your butt.
2007-08-20 09:54:30 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I have beat 3 speeding tickets with the police officer there - But you did not state the violation
knowing the laws helps I used Prima facie law verse radar
since the officer used radar gun to determine speed it was clear he was depending on the gun and did not make judgement call I was driving unsafe - as long as you do not exceed the maximum state speed limit and it was safe to drive that speed it is legal - admit the speed and argue it was safe.
but we often commit minor infractions of the law every day driving no matter how careful
so the one ticket you get to pay is a average over
2016-10-13 11:50:22 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋