Question about traffic infractions?

Question

Can anyone explain to me, in simple language, the constitutional basis for traffic infractions in California? Specifically, I am looking for a justification of why certain rights, like for example the right to a trial by jury, are not applicable. I know the penalties are limited but I don't understand what that has to do with it.

Thanks for the responses thus far. Basically, I am looking for a constitutional explanation. In other words, the constitution guarantees trial by jury in all cases, so how can the legislature say that it only applies to "serious crimes"?

Answer 1

California Constitution, Article I:
“SEC. 16. Trial by jury is an inviolate right and shall be secured to all…”

California Penal Code:
“16. Crimes and public offenses include: 1. Felonies; 2. Misdemeanors; and 3. Infractions.”
“689. No person can be convicted of a public offense unless by verdict of a jury…”
“1042.5. Trial of an infraction shall be by the court…”
“19.6. An infraction is not punishable by imprisonment. A person charged with an infraction shall not be entitled to a trial by jury…”

People v. Carlucci (1978) 77 Cal.App.3d 421:
“The Legislature, in classifying certain matters as infractions punishable by a fine only and removing the right to a jury trial, was endeavoring to alleviate the burden on the courts which resulted from providing jury trials in these cases.”

*/End of Line.

Answer 2

Your problem is your basic premise. The United States Constitution does NOT guarantee the right to jury trial in "all cases." The United States Supreme Court has held that the Constitution adopted the common law in this area, which provided a right to jury trial only in "serious" cases, while a jury is not necessary for petty offenses. (Duncan v. Louisiana (1968) 391 U.S. 145.) Over the years, the rule has been fairly well established that if the defendant is not facing a punishment of more than six months in custody, it is a petty offense. Since you cannot be placed in custody at all for a traffic infraction, there is no federal jury trial right.

The right to jury trial in California is broader, and applies in any felony or misdemeanor case, no matter what the possible punishment may be. However, since a traffic ticket is not a felony or misdemeanor, there is no state jury trial right.

Answer 3

Traffic citations are not acts of crime which require a trail by jury. You either broke the law or you didn't. You can always ask it to be pushed to a higher court...which in most cases gets thrown out after being backlogged for 2 years...but the bail you paid is usually as much if not more than what the actual ticket would have cost you.

Answer 4

Basically, because they are infractions based on administrative codes, codified by legislature. Jury trials are for serious crimes.

Answer 5

The violation is crossing the white divider. in case you went over 2 inches or 2 ft is beside the point. in case you crossed the divider via any quantity, you're to blame. it is precisely what the choose is going to evaluate, did you pass via any quantity? you're able to be able to argue that the fact asserting you crossed via 2 ft. is providing data to the courtroom previous to the trial, subsequently the fee could desire to be brushed off on a technicality. Telling the choose how a ways you crossed over is attesting till now the trial and not allowed decrease than the regulations of knowledge. The choose won't agree, yet once you would be convicted besides, you're able to be able to besides recent this as an argument.

Answer 6

when your civil right are being threaten than you need a jury but a fine or penalty is not life threatening