Who polices the traffic courts?
April 4, 2012 8:59 AM Subscribe
Why don't traffic courts follow the law?
Inspired by this question earlier, I'm wondering why traffic courts seems to ignore the basic principles of the US legal system. Sorry if this is a bit long.
I had a similar situation a few years ago - I received a speeding ticket in Putnam County, NY on the northern section of 684 going into Brewster. It was a bogus ticket, but that's not the issue here.
In NY state, your court appearance date and time are printed directly on your ticket. I dutifully showed up at the courthouse, only to find out the courthouse had moved. OK, fine, the ticketing computer in the cop cars didn't have the updated address when I was pulled over. I gave "the system" a pass on that one. I drove over to the new courthouse, and nobody was there except for a file clerk! Apparently that evening's traffic court was rescheduled. I never received notice of this - I'm assuming other people did or I wouldn't have been the only angry person there.
So I found out when I needed to reappear, and came back again. I took a number, waited my turn, and spoke with the prosecutor when my number was called - apparently their M.O. is to strike deals with everyone they can before anyone actually appears before the judge. I explained that I had already shown up for court once before (twice if you count the wrong address), according to the only official document I had received, which was the ticket itself. I asked for my ticket to be dismissed because I had already fulfilled my part of the justice proceedings even though nobody else had. The prosecutor actually laughed in my face and said it doesn't work that way, and even if it did, notices were mailed out to notify people of the date change.
I explained I hadn't received any notice and that he was welcome to check with the file clerk I spoke with on the original date to verify I had shown up. I also said that the notices obviously weren't sent by certified mail so they didn't actually know who received it - or if they had been sent certified, then they had verification that mine was never delivered and signed for, and therefore my case should still be dismissed. At that point the prosecutor said something along the lines of "It's been a long day and I don't want to keep playing games with everyone who thinks they know how to beat the system. If I knock your ticket down to a minor moving offense with no points and a smaller fine, will you move along and stop wasting my time?" I knew my cop was there, and that despite it being a bogus ticket the judge had no reason to believe me over him - and not being a lawyer myself I didn't know what I would even say to the judge in a legal sense to make her understand that my case shouldn't even be in front of her to begin with - so I took the deal and paid my fine.
So I guess my actual question is twofold: first, is what happened to me actually legal? I showed up at the date and time as summoned on the only official document I received (the ticket), so my case should have been dismissed, right? I understand it happens all the time, but that doesn't necessarily mean it would stand up to legal scrutiny. Second, what is it about traffic courts where the basic principles of the law are set aside for the convenience of the state or local government - i.e. that the right to face your accuser should mean "no cop=case dismissed" but actually means "sorry come back again"; or the right to a speedy trial (I showed up and was postponed with no official notice).
I know that many jurisdictions count on speeding tickets as a guaranteed source of revenue, in most cases more than actual service toward public safety - hence cop quotas, speed traps, and bogus tickets such as mine - and I understand that the traffic court system operates in a way that maximizes the state's revenue, but how is that OK?
Thanks!
Inspired by this question earlier, I'm wondering why traffic courts seems to ignore the basic principles of the US legal system. Sorry if this is a bit long.
I had a similar situation a few years ago - I received a speeding ticket in Putnam County, NY on the northern section of 684 going into Brewster. It was a bogus ticket, but that's not the issue here.
In NY state, your court appearance date and time are printed directly on your ticket. I dutifully showed up at the courthouse, only to find out the courthouse had moved. OK, fine, the ticketing computer in the cop cars didn't have the updated address when I was pulled over. I gave "the system" a pass on that one. I drove over to the new courthouse, and nobody was there except for a file clerk! Apparently that evening's traffic court was rescheduled. I never received notice of this - I'm assuming other people did or I wouldn't have been the only angry person there.
So I found out when I needed to reappear, and came back again. I took a number, waited my turn, and spoke with the prosecutor when my number was called - apparently their M.O. is to strike deals with everyone they can before anyone actually appears before the judge. I explained that I had already shown up for court once before (twice if you count the wrong address), according to the only official document I had received, which was the ticket itself. I asked for my ticket to be dismissed because I had already fulfilled my part of the justice proceedings even though nobody else had. The prosecutor actually laughed in my face and said it doesn't work that way, and even if it did, notices were mailed out to notify people of the date change.
I explained I hadn't received any notice and that he was welcome to check with the file clerk I spoke with on the original date to verify I had shown up. I also said that the notices obviously weren't sent by certified mail so they didn't actually know who received it - or if they had been sent certified, then they had verification that mine was never delivered and signed for, and therefore my case should still be dismissed. At that point the prosecutor said something along the lines of "It's been a long day and I don't want to keep playing games with everyone who thinks they know how to beat the system. If I knock your ticket down to a minor moving offense with no points and a smaller fine, will you move along and stop wasting my time?" I knew my cop was there, and that despite it being a bogus ticket the judge had no reason to believe me over him - and not being a lawyer myself I didn't know what I would even say to the judge in a legal sense to make her understand that my case shouldn't even be in front of her to begin with - so I took the deal and paid my fine.
So I guess my actual question is twofold: first, is what happened to me actually legal? I showed up at the date and time as summoned on the only official document I received (the ticket), so my case should have been dismissed, right? I understand it happens all the time, but that doesn't necessarily mean it would stand up to legal scrutiny. Second, what is it about traffic courts where the basic principles of the law are set aside for the convenience of the state or local government - i.e. that the right to face your accuser should mean "no cop=case dismissed" but actually means "sorry come back again"; or the right to a speedy trial (I showed up and was postponed with no official notice).
I know that many jurisdictions count on speeding tickets as a guaranteed source of revenue, in most cases more than actual service toward public safety - hence cop quotas, speed traps, and bogus tickets such as mine - and I understand that the traffic court system operates in a way that maximizes the state's revenue, but how is that OK?
Thanks!
This post was deleted for the following reason: This is kind of far into "why does this not work the way I want it to" territory rather than a concrete problem askme can help you solve. If you can pare this down to a more answerable core question it'd be fine to give it another shot next week. -- cortex
Sounds to me like you had a bad experience in traffic court. I'm sorry for that.
Doesn't make this anywhere near a halfway-decent question.
posted by valkyryn at 9:02 AM on April 4, 2012 [2 favorites]
Doesn't make this anywhere near a halfway-decent question.
posted by valkyryn at 9:02 AM on April 4, 2012 [2 favorites]
what inigo2 and valkyryn said.
court dates are mutable. certain aspects of court dates are covered by rules of procedure, sure, but cases are continued all the time. even capital criminal cases. even traffic cases. even divorces, even cases being heard on emergency motions.
And the often repeated statement that "if the cop doesn't show, your (misdemeanor traffic) case is dismissed" is not a rule of law or an accurate of law. It's not an accurate statement of a constitutional right. It's nothing other than a general observation that in cattle call traffic court, you have a decent chance of a dismissed case (possibly for want of prosecution) if the witness doesn't show but that is only one of several permissible outcomes under the laws, rules, and procedures of most U.S. jurisidictions.
posted by crush-onastick at 9:07 AM on April 4, 2012 [1 favorite]
court dates are mutable. certain aspects of court dates are covered by rules of procedure, sure, but cases are continued all the time. even capital criminal cases. even traffic cases. even divorces, even cases being heard on emergency motions.
And the often repeated statement that "if the cop doesn't show, your (misdemeanor traffic) case is dismissed" is not a rule of law or an accurate of law. It's not an accurate statement of a constitutional right. It's nothing other than a general observation that in cattle call traffic court, you have a decent chance of a dismissed case (possibly for want of prosecution) if the witness doesn't show but that is only one of several permissible outcomes under the laws, rules, and procedures of most U.S. jurisidictions.
posted by crush-onastick at 9:07 AM on April 4, 2012 [1 favorite]
Response by poster: Not purposely threadsitting, I promise :)
I never received a follow-up summons with the new court date - meaning I was never legally informed of when I could show up to fight the ticket. I imagine that part of the procedures crush-onastick mentioned require that all parties are properly informed, right?
valkyryn - what about my question makes it bad? Not being snarky, just still new to MeFi and not sure what would have made it better. I'm specifically asking about whether the tactics observed by me and others are actually legal, despite their rampant use.
posted by trivia genius at 9:13 AM on April 4, 2012
I never received a follow-up summons with the new court date - meaning I was never legally informed of when I could show up to fight the ticket. I imagine that part of the procedures crush-onastick mentioned require that all parties are properly informed, right?
valkyryn - what about my question makes it bad? Not being snarky, just still new to MeFi and not sure what would have made it better. I'm specifically asking about whether the tactics observed by me and others are actually legal, despite their rampant use.
posted by trivia genius at 9:13 AM on April 4, 2012
My impression is that the whole justice system regularly has fuck-ups exactly as you described, its just sample bias from the fact that privileged folk rarely interact with anything else, with a small side of people usually giving more of a shit when its not just traffic court.
posted by Blasdelb at 9:14 AM on April 4, 2012
posted by Blasdelb at 9:14 AM on April 4, 2012
« Older Help me spend less time in the bathroom while I'm... | It's not head vs. heart, it's more like heart vs.... Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.
Based on what legal principle exactly?
posted by inigo2 at 9:00 AM on April 4, 2012 [1 favorite]