PDA

View Full Version : Trial By Declaration (How To)



Blaze
07-05-2005, 05:11 PM
Trial By Declaration (TBD)

The following FAQ is based on information I�ve leveraged from the Internet. It should serve as a step by step guide taking your through the process of accepting a ticket, requesting the TBD, and what to spend your money on after you�ve won. I have personally sent in similar declarations and won my cases, so I know the process works.

Getting a ticket


http://a335.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images01/52/l_619abd2f9355f11afc8ddc296a7b2036.jpg

Okay, this is the easy part. Go out and commit a moving violation in front of a cop. Go on, you know you want to�. When a cop pulls you over, you need to remember a few things that may help defuse the situation. Most of these are self explanatory.

1. Signal, then calmly move into a safe parked location.
2. Turn off your car. Forget about letting your car idle down. Turn it off.
3. If it�s night time, turn on your dome light so that the cop can see what you�re doing as he approaches the car.
4. Have your window down and your hands either on the steering wheel or out the window with your keys in hand.
5. Be polite, but do not admit any guilt. The cop may or may not be a dick. If he/she is, just take it up the ass for now, because it will help you greatly later if he/she does not have something to remember you by (ie your smart ass mouth).

Okay, you did it! You got a ticket. I hope it was worth it. No lets get you off the hook.

Requesting a Trial By Declaration

There are two ways to request a TBD. Depending on where in the world you are located you may want to write into the courts and formally request a TBD. You can download the request forms online. I suggest you send everything certified mail so that you have a record of it. The second, easier way is to wait until you get your summons in the mail, then walk into the court house during off peak hours, find the clerks office and request it in person. He/She will give you everything you need and send you on your way.

Note: In order to perform a TBD, you will need to pay the bail in full prior to continuing the process. So, if your ticket was for $170.00, you will need to bring in a cash, check or money order either to the clerk�s office or enclosed in your TBD request packet.

Writing the declaration

This obviously is the most important part of the TBD. There are a few things to understand first before getting into the meat of the declaration. First, if you had decided to plead not guilty and appear in court in person, officers are paid overtime to appear in court against you. So obviously they are motivated to do so. Also if you are appearing in court, the officer and judge may already have a repore that may work against you. Also a number of other things can obviously go wrong if you show up in person. With a TBD, on the other hand, the police are not paid anything extra. In fact, it�s just more paperwork for them. There are smart cops as well as dumb ones as you may have guess. But none of them are lawyers. My point here is that if/when they write in their side of the story; they may not be as well spoken as you. All of this will ultimately work in your favor. Do you no speaka de ingliss good? That will no longer be a problem, just use on of the examples at the end of the FAQ. You�ll need to change the names, case number and some other misc. information, but by far, these should be versatile enough for most of your scenarios.

Once you�ve got all your paperwork together, you can walk it in to the court or mail it in. If you choose to mail the documents in, I again advise that you do so by certified mail.

The Waiting Game

Now that everything is set in motion, it�s time to wait. The officer is given notice of your intent to conduct a TBD and he�s given ample time to respond. You will be notified of the court date (don�t worry you don�t have to appear) when the declarations will be reviewed. Following that you�ll be notified several weeks later of the outcome. Following that, you�ll wait another 60-90 days to receive your check from the state refunding your bail.

What if the cop is a genius and I loose

Yeah right.

Okay, let�s say you ignore the examples and choose to write the declaration in Egyptian Hieroglyphics and using a purple crayon (un sharpened). It�s not the end of the world. Fortunately you will be given a second chance.


40902. (d) If the defendant is dissatisfied with a decision of the court in a proceeding pursuant to this section, the defendant shall be granted a trial de novo.
To request a trial de novo you need to submit (in person or by mail) a Form TR-220. This is available online as either a blank form or a fillable form.
The TR-220 must be received by the court within 20 days of the date the clerk mails you the decision.
Once you have requested a trial de novo, you will need to prepare for your trial (unless you intend to enter a plea of "No Contest" or ask for traffic school).

Statement of Facts

Please feel free to use the examples below in your trial by declaration. Obviously you will need to change the names, case number and other key information. However the format and verbiage of at least one of these should be well suited for your needs.



Example 1

STATEMENT OF FACTS

Defendant's Name: Simone De Beauvoir
Case No.: S780824

I respectfully submit this written declaration to the Court pursuant to CVC 40902. I plead Not Guilty to the charge of violating CVC 22350.

The facts of my case are as follows: While driving on Sorrento Valley Road on 10-21-99, I was stopped by a SDPD Officer (I.D.#1234) and was charged with violating CVC 22350. The Officer has alleged that I was driving 62mph in a 45mph zone based on Radar evidence. I believe that I was driving approximately 50-55mph at the time of my stop and that my speed was quite safe for the prevailing conditions.

The Basic Speed Law, CVC 22350 states: "No person shall drive a vehicle upon a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable or prudent having due regard for weather, visibility, the traffic on, and the surface and width of the highway, and in no event at a speed which endangers the safety of persons or property."

At the time of my stop, the road was dry and clear with light traffic. On my citation, the officer marks that the traffic was "light." No persons or property were put at risk. As such, the Officer does not make a credible case that I was in violation of the Basic Speed Law.

Further, I believe that the posted speed of 45mph on Sorrento Valley Road is artificially low, reflecting an out-of-date traffic and engineering survey and, as such, may constitute an illegal Speed Trap pursuant to CVC 40802(a)(2) which defines an illegal radar speed trap as:"A particular section of a highway with a...speed limit that is provided by this code...[which] limit is not justified by an engineering and traffic survey conducted within five years prior to the date of the alleged violation, and enforcement of the speed limit involves the use of radar or any other electronic device that measures the speed of moving objects." If the traffic survey on Sorento valley Road is more than five years old, the officer's use of radar to determine my speed was illegal.

When using radar evidence, the prosecution is required to prove that the use of radar is not an illegal speed trap. Speed Trap Evidence 40803(b) states: "In any prosecution under this code of a charge involving the speed of a vehicle, where enforcement involves the use of radar or other electronic devices which measure the speed of moving objects, the prosecution shall establish, as part of its prima facie case, that the evidence or testimony presented is not based upon a speed trap as defined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 40802."

If the prosecution does not attach proof with its written declaration (a certified copy of the speed survey) to establish as part of its prima facie case, that Sorrento Valley Road is not an illegal Speed Trap, as they are required to do pursuant to CVC 40803(b), I trust the Court will rule the radar evidence inadmissible and dismiss my case pursuant to CVC 40805.

CVC 40805, Admission of Speed Trap Evidence, states:"Every court shall be without jurisdiction to render a judgement of conviction against any person for violation of this code involving the speed of a vehicle if the court admits any evidence or testimony secured in violation of, or which is inadmissible under this article."

I trust in the Court's fairness and ask that my citation be dismissed in the interest of justice.

If the court does not find in my favor in this case, I request a fine reduction and a Court assignment to attend traffic school.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.

Date:

Simone De Beauvoir, Defendant in Pro Per


Example 2

STATEMENT OF FACTS

Defendant's Name: Lucas Ridgeston
Case No.: S780824

I respectfully submit this written declaration to the Court pursuant to CVC 40902. I plead Not Guilty to the charge of violating CVC 22350.

The facts of my case are as follows: While driving west bound on Meade at 0855 on 3-17-99, I was stopped by SDPD Officer Ffrengig (I.D.#1234) and was charged with violating CVC 22350. Officer Ffrengig has alleged that I was driving approximately 33mph in a 25mph zone based on RADAR evidence. I know that I was traveling a Safe and Reasonable speed for conditions at the time of my stop, and was therefore not in violation of the Basic Speed Law.

The Basic Speed Law, CVC 22350, states: "No person shall drive a vehicle upon a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable or prudent having due regard for weather, visibility, the traffic on, and the surface and width of the highway, and in no event at a speed which endangers the safety of persons or property."

On my citation, the officer fails to note any of these relevant conditions except for traffic, which he correctly notes as "Medium." I can attest that the road was dry with clear visibility at the time of my stop. Officer Ffrengig also fails to note the Safe Speed for Meade in the appropriate space on my Notice to Appear. I know that I was traveling a Safe and Reasonable speed for conditions on Meade when I was stopped.

My assertion that my speed was Safe and Reasonable for conditions is supported by the most recent Traffic and Engineering survey for Meade which gives the Safe Speed (85th percentile speed) as 32 mph, which is just 1mph different than the "approximate" speed Officer Ffrengig noted on my citation. Based on this evidence, I know that I was not in violation of the Basic Speed Law at the time and place of my citation and, pursuant to the common sense spirit of CVC 22350, contest that my speed at the time of my traffic stop was therefore not per se unlawful.

Further, I believe that the officer's radar may have been tracking one of several cars other than mine. There were cars driving in front of me and also passing me as I proceeded down Meade; the presence of these vehicles was properly attested to on my citation by Officer Ffrengig as "Medium" traffic. The typical beam angle (spread) of police radar is 12-16 degrees, resulting in a beam width of 1 foot for every 4 feet of travel of the beam from the antennae. Therefore at 160 feet from its source, a police radar beam is typically 40 feet (four lanes) wide.

The officer noted on my citation that my radar-determined speed was 33mph from 150 feet away, a distance at which any of several cars then traveling through the officer's two-lane wide radar beam might have caused the speed indicated on the officer's unit. Due to the officer's indication of "medium" traffic and his notation that my alleged speed was determined at a 150' distance, it is clear that there is reasonable doubt as to which car's speed his radar unit was indicating.

Due to this reasonable doubt, and the fact that the Traffic and Engineering Survey for Meade has determined the Safe Speed to be 32mph, approximately the speed the officer claims I was traveling, I ask the Court to dismiss my citation in the interest of justice.

If the court does not find in my favor in this case, I request a fine reduction and a Court assignment to attend traffic school.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.

Date:

Lucas Ridgeston, Defendant in Pro Per


Example 3

STATEMENT OF FACTS

Defendant's Name: Quentin Crisp
Case No.: S780824

I respectfully submit this written declaration to the Court pursuant to CVC 40902. I plead Not Guilty to the charge of violating CVC 22350.

The facts of my case are as follows: While driving on Madera Street in Lemon Grove at 0830 on 10-22-98, I was stopped by Deputy Perchyll (I.D.#1234) and was charged with violating CVC 22350. Deputy Perchyll has alleged that I was driving 41mph in a 25mph zone based on RADAR evidence. In fact, I was traveling 40mph in a posted 40mph zone.

Deputy Perchyll asserts that I was driving in a school zone with a temporary prima facie speed limit of 25mph, which is the sole basis of my citation. However, the Deputy did not cite me for driving in a prima facie school zone, CVC 22352(b)(2); he cited me for breaking the Basic Speed Law, CVC 22350. I did not break the Basic Speed Law. I know that I was traveling a Safe and Reasonable speed for conditions at the time of my stop, 40mph in a posted 40mph zone.

The Basic Speed Law, CVC 22350, states: "No person shall drive a vehicle upon a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable or prudent having due regard for weather, visibility, the traffic on, and the surface and width of the highway, and in no event at a speed which endangers the safety of persons or property."

At the time of my stop, the road was dry and clear with light traffic. No persons or property were put at risk by my driving 40mph in a posted 40mph zone. The mere act of passing a school at 40mph in a 40mph zone is not assumed to "endanger the safety of persons or property" under the Basic Speed Law. As such, the Deputy does not make a credible case that I was in violation of the Basic Speed Law at the time of my stop.

Further, I believe that a posted speed of 40mph on Madera Street is artificially low, reflecting a possibly out-of-date traffic and engineering survey and, as such, the Deputy's use of Radar may constitute a Speed Trap pursuant to CVC 40802(a)(1) (traffic survey more than five years old).

If the prosecution does not attach proof with its Written Declaration (a certified copy of the speed survey for 1700 Madera Street), to establish as part of its prima facie case, that the road I was cited on was not a Speed Trap, as they are required to do pursuant to CVC 40803(b), Speed Trap Evidence, I trust that the Court will rule the RADAR evidence inadmissible and dismiss my case pursuant to CVC 40805.

I trust in the Court's fairness and believe that my citation should be dismissed in the interest of justice.

If the court does not find in my favor in this case, I request a fine reduction and a Court assignment to attend traffic school.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.

Date:

Quentin Crisp, Defendant in Pro Per



Example 4

May 18, 2004
Superior Court, County of Los Angeles
1427 West Covina Parkway
West Covina, CA 91790




To Whom It May Concern:


I am writing in regards to my trial by declaration. The bail amount of $111.00 has already been received by Deputy Clerk, Margaret Orban.

On the night of March 22, 2004, I was traveling on Fullerton Rd, northbound, just south of the 60 freeway. While on Fullerton, I stopped at a traffic light at Diamond Plaza Way, just before the eastbound onramp to the 60 freeway. I was stopped behind a silver 1998-2000 Honda Accord at the time on the far right lane as the light had turned red. As the traffic light turned green, the Accord ahead of me began to accelerate, and as I normally do, I followed. While at the traffic light I also noticed a police unit parked with its parking lights on, at the Shell gas station at the corner of Fullerton and Diamond Plaza Way. As I approached the gas station, I noticed the lights of the police unit turn on and begin moving forward, well before I had passed in front of the police unit. As I passed in front of the police unit, I had noticed that he had pulled to the exit of the gas station, and continued to follow me up the onramp of the 60 freeway heading eastbound. About 500ft up the ramp, the officer turned on his light bar, at which time I pulled to the right to the emergency lane and stopped my vehicle. I was confused as to why I was pulled over, and asked the officer as he approached my vehicle. His response to me was that �Your exhaust is too loud.� After which he requested my license and registration and gave me my citation.

I believe that there is reasonable doubt as to Officer Arruda�s judgement in regards to the indicated exhaust violation stated by the CVC code 21750.

Firstly, I have attached a certification from the State Referee Station in Chaffey College, indicating that the exhaust noise level of my vehicle does meet the legal limit of 95dB. The certificate indicated the exhaust noise level of my vehicle to be at 93dB, below that of the 95dB limit as set by the testing methods indicated by the CCR, Title 13, Division 2, Chapter 4, Article 9 in regards to CVC 27150.

Secondly, I believe that Officer Arruda may have mistaken the exhaust noise he heard from the Accord�s for my car. While at the traffic light, I had noticed the Accord having a large dual exhaust system. I believe that Officer Arruda may have heard the exhaust noise coming from that vehicle, as I noticed him pull his car to the exit of the gas station as the Accord was passing in front of him, and right before I passed in front of him. The modified exhaust on that vehicle was about the same sound volume, if not louder, than mine, and I believe that if Officer Arruda had began to move his vehicle before I had passed him, there is a high probability that he mistook the exhaust noise of the Accord�s as my vehicle�s.

I have enclosed 3 additional pages I would like admitted as evidence: a copy of the receipt for service at the Chaffey College Referee Station, a copy of the Referee Station Vehicle Inspection Report, and a copy of the Certificate indicating vehicle exhaust noise compliance affixed to the back of the issued Notice to Appear citation.


Thank you,


Adam West
(Mayor)

WavMixer
12-22-2005, 08:38 AM
*EDIT*
The document below was used successfully to fight my case with TBD. I WON!!!


To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing in regards to my trial by declaration. The bail amount of $186.00 has already been received by Santa Clarita Court, receipt # xxxxxxxxx on 12/2/05.

I respectfully submit this written declaration to the Court pursuant to CVC 40902. I plead Not Guilty to the charge of violating CVC 22350.*

On November 11th I was ticketed for allegedly traveling at 69mph in a 50mph zone. I believe that I was driving approximately 55-60mph at the time of my stop and that my speed was quite safe for the prevailing conditions.

The Basic Speed Law, CVC 22350 states: "No person shall drive a vehicle upon a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable or prudent having due regard for weather, visibility, the traffic on, and the surface and width of the highway, and in no event at a speed which endangers the safety of persons or property."

On my citation, the officer fails to note any of these relevant conditions including traffic, which would be correctly described as "Light to Medium." I can attest that the road was dry with clear visibility at the time of my stop. Officer Banks also fails to note the Safe Speed for Sierra Highway in the appropriate space on my Notice to Appear. I know that I was traveling a Safe and Reasonable speed for conditions on Sierra Highway when I was stopped. No persons or property were put at risk by my driving. As such, the Officer does not make a credible case that I was in violation of the Basic Speed Law.

Further, I believe that the posted speed of 50mph on Sierra Highway is artificially low, reflecting an out-of-date traffic and engineering survey and, as such, may constitute an illegal Speed Trap pursuant to CVC 40802(a)(2) which defines an illegal radar speed trap as: "A particular section of a highway with a...speed limit that is provided by this code...[which] limit is not justified by an engineering and traffic survey conducted within five years prior to the date of the alleged violation, and enforcement of the speed limit involves the use of radar or any other electronic device that measures the speed of moving objects." If the traffic survey on Sierra Highway is more than five years old, the officer's use of radar to determine my speed was illegal.

When using radar evidence, the prosecution is required to prove that the use of radar is not an illegal speed trap. CVC 40803(b) states: "In any prosecution under this code of a charge involving the speed of a vehicle, where enforcement involves the use of radar or other electronic devices which measure the speed of moving objects, the prosecution shall establish, as part of its prima facie case, that the evidence or testimony presented is not based upon a speed trap as defined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 40802."

The prosecution must include a certified copy of the speed survey, to establish that Sierra Highway is not an illegal Speed Trap. This is required pursuant to CVC 40803(b).* I trust the court will rule the radar evidence inadmissible and dismiss my case pursuant to CVC 40805 if the prosecution does not provide a certified speed survey for Sierra Highway.

CVC 40805, Admission of Speed Trap Evidence, states: "Every court shall be without jurisdiction to render a judgment of conviction against any person for violation of this code involving the speed of a vehicle if the court admits any evidence or testimony secured in violation of, or which is inadmissible under this article." This code confirms that the officer's radar evidence should be inadmissible without verification of the speed survey.

CVC40802(c)(1)(A) states: When radar is used, the arresting officer has successfully completed a radar operator course of not less than 24 hours on the use of police traffic radar, and the course was approved and certified by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST).

Further, I believe that the officer's radar may have targeted one of several cars other than mine.
There was a vehicle passing me as I drove down Sierra Highway, however he suddenly applied his brakes, just before we passed officer Banks in the parked radar unit. As a result of the other cars rapid braking I was going faster when passing the parked patrol car. When I noticed the other car braking hard and saw the parked patrol car ahead of me, I looked at my speedometer and it was reading approximately 56-58. Although I was going above the posted speed limit, I believe that the other car gave triggered the radar reading of 69mph.

The typical beam angle (spread) of police radar is 12-16 degrees, resulting in a beam width of 1 foot for every 4 feet of travel of the beam from the antennae. Therefore at 80 feet from its source, a police radar beam is typically 20 feet (two lanes) wide. Either of the cars then traveling through the officer's multi-lane wide radar beam might have caused the speed indicated on the officer's unit. I believe that this provides reasonable doubt as to which vehicle was actually targeted going 69mph.

The officer should provide documentary proof to the court that he successfully completed this radar operator course certified and approved by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training. If the officer does not submit proof with his declaration that he successfully completed this minimum 24-hour course in accordance with CVC40802(c)(1)(A), my case should be dismissed. His use of RADAR is not legal without this course, and his RADAR evidence is inadmissible. I urge the court to not accept hearsay testimony in lieu of documentary evidence to verify course completion. If the course was completed, documentary proof should be provided.

CVC40802(c)(1)(D) requires that:* The radar, laser, or other electronic device used to measure the speed of the accused meets or exceeds the minimal operational standards of the National Traffic Highway Safety Administration, and has been calibrated within the three years prior to the date of the alleged violation by an independent certified laser or radar repair and testing or calibration facility.

The Officer should provide documentary proof that his RADAR meets or exceeds National Highway Traffic Administration Standards in accordance with CVC40802(c)(1)(D). At minimum, the officer should provide documents to the court proving that his RADAR has been calibrated within 3 years by an independent certified testing or calibration facility pursuant to CVC40802(c)(1)(D). If the officer cannot provide this evidence to the court, his RADAR evidence is inadmissible and my case should be dismissed.

I urge the court to not accept hearsay testimony in lieu of documentary evidence to verify required radar calibration. If the calibration was completed, documentary proof should be provided.* *Further, the officer should prove that the testing facility was certified and independent from the police department.

Finally, the officer must prove, pursuant to 40802 (c)(1)(C)(i) that he established prior to issuing my citation that his RADAR was properly calibrated within three years to NTHSA standards.

This standard is stated clearly in the code, which establishes that a conviction is not warranted unless The prosecution proved that, prior to the officer issuing the notice to appear, the arresting officer established that the radar, laser, or other electronic device conformed to the requirements of subparagraph (D). If the officer does not prove this standard, my case should be dismissed.

The purpose of the strict legal standards in police use of radar is to prevent abuse of this technology through poorly trained operators or defective uncalibrated equipment. These should be considered minimum standards by the court in protecting defendants against the power of the state. I respectfully ask the court to uphold these minimum standards of protection.

The officer must provide documentary proof to verify the required standards of his radar equipment and operator training. If these legal standards are not each properly and fully documented, I urge the court to dismiss my citation in the interest of justice. Please do not accept hearsay statements in lieu of documentary evidence.

If the court does not find in my favor in this case, I request a fine reduction and a court assignment to attend traffic school.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.

_____________________
Wav Mixer

Blaze
03-16-2006, 10:02 PM
Example 5

STATEMENT OF FACTS

Defendant's Name: Peter Griffen
Case No.: 534806EH

I respectfully submit this written declaration to the Court pursuant to CVC 40902. I plead Not Guilty to the charge of violating CVC 21550A.

The facts of my case are as follows: While driving on John F Kennedy Dr. on 12-14-05, I was stopped by a SDPD Officer (I.D.#2963) and was charged with violating CVC 21550A. The Officer has alleged that I had failed to yield in a pedestrian crosswalk. I believe that as I approached the intersection, there were no pedestrians visible.

CVC 21950 (A) states: "The driver of a vehicle shall yield the right-of-way to a pedestrian crossing the roadway within any marked crosswalk or within any unmarked crosswalk at an intersection, except as otherwise provided in this chapter."

As I approached the intersection, there were no signs of pedestrians entering or waiting to enter the crosswalk. At the time of my stop, the Officer stated that I had not yielded to a pedestrian preparing to enter the crosswalk an indicated the position on the sidewalk. This position however would not have been visible to me as I approached due to an SUV parked at the curb.

CVC 21950 (B) states: "This section does not relieve a pedestrian from the duty of using due care for his or her safety. No pedestrian may suddenly leave a curb or other place of safety and walk or run into the path of a vehicle that is so close as to constitute an immediate hazard. No pedestrian may unnecessarily stop or delay traffic while in a marked or unmarked crosswalk."

I trust in the Court's fairness and ask that my citation be dismissed in the interest of justice.

If the court does not find in my favor in this case, I request a fine reduction and a Court assignment to attend traffic school.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.

Date: March 16, 2006

Peter Griffen, Defendant in Pro Per

Blaze
06-26-2006, 12:16 AM
Okay guys, this one is embarassing and amazing at the same time.
Embarassing, due to how poorly the case was built.
Amazing that it was actually dismissed!

A friend of mine made an illegal turn coming off a freeway exit ramp. (one of those no turns on red). Then he turns into a gas station where a cop was, busy picking he nose and dusting donut droppings off his lapel. The cop sites him and that's about the end of it.

I'm used to writing TBDs for speeding, but I've done one or two other moving violations using a similar format and bits and pieces of facts/clauses that I can find online. <-- I'm not very original.

So without going into the details of where I found this, I'll just post this TBD for an illegal turn against a traffic control device (more or less).


Example 6

STATEMENT OF FACTS

Defendant's Name: Kakarot
Case No.: 0U812

I respectfully submit this written declaration to the Court pursuant to CVC 40902. I plead Not Guilty to the charge of violating CVC 22101.

The facts of my case are as follows: While refueling my vehicle at the Unical station on January 10, 2006, I was approached by a SDPD Officer (I.D.#1234) and was charged with violating CVC 22101. The Officer has alleged that I turned illegally onto National Blvd from the Westbound 10 freeway exit. At the time of my stop, the road was dry and clear with light traffic. I believe that the turn was made legally and safely for the prevailing conditions.

CVC 21100(b) states: "Local authorities may adopt rules and regulations by ordinance or resolution regarding the following matters:
(b) Regulating traffic by means of official traffic control devices meeting the requirements of Section 21400."

CVC 21450 restricts colors used in official traffic control devices to red, yellow, and green only.

The officer considered a posted sign to qualify as a traffic control device. However in this case, it does not adhere to standards outlined above for this citation. As such, the Officer does not make a credible case that I was in violation of CVC 22101.

I trust the Court will rule the posted sign does not qualify as a traffic control device as described in the CVC code(s) and dismiss my case.

If the court does not find in my favor in this case, I request a fine reduction and a Court assignment to attend traffic school.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.

Date:

Kakarot (SSJ4), Defendant in Pro Per

Blaze
09-21-2006, 03:50 PM
can someone please post a TBD for exceeding 100mph??
cvc 22348?

regards
flip


Cris:

100+ normally requires an appearance in court, so please check your ticket and the paperwork that comes in the mail. Otherwise, I'll do what I can to help AND/or you should contact Grant/WavMixer as he fought a similar case for his son recently.

Blaze
09-21-2006, 03:56 PM
This is one of my more recent TBDs. It's based on the old one, and is currently being used to fight a ticket involving an aircraft. Thanks to several members for helping me out with this.

Blaze

Example 6


STATEMENT OF FACTS

Defendant's Name: Meg Griffen
Case No.: 93263BV

I respectfully submit this written declaration to the Court pursuant to CVC 40902. I plead Not Guilty to the charge of violating CVC 22349.

The facts of my case are as follows: While driving on I5 on 05-04-06, I was stopped by a CHP Officer (I.D.#15353) and was charged with violating CVC 22349. The Officer has alleged that I was driving 85mph in a 65mph zone based on Aircraft evidence. I believe that I was driving approximately 70mph at the time of my stop and that my speed was quite safe for the prevailing conditions.

The Basic Speed Law, CVC 22350 states: "No person shall drive a vehicle upon a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable or prudent having due regard for weather, visibility, the traffic on, and the surface and width of the highway, and in no event at a speed which endangers the safety of persons or property."

At the time of my stop, the road was dry and clear with light traffic. No persons or property were put at risk.

Further, I believe that the method in which my speed was evaluated is subject to error and, may constitute an illegal Speed Trap pursuant to CVC 40802(a)(2).

40801. States that “No peace officer or other person shall use a speed trap in arresting, or participating or assisting in the arrest of, any person for any alleged violation of this code nor shall any speed trap be used in securing evidence as to the speed of any vehicle for the purpose of an arrest or prosecution under this code.”

40802. (a) Describes a "speed trap" as “A particular section of a highway measured as to distance and with boundaries marked, designated, or otherwise determined in order that the speed of a vehicle may be calculated by securing the time it takes the vehicle to travel the known distance.”

40803. (a) “No evidence as to the speed of a vehicle upon a highway shall be admitted in any court upon the trial of any person in any prosecution under this code upon a charge involving the speed of a vehicle when the evidence is based upon or obtained from or by the maintenance or use of a speedtrap.”

40804. (a) “In any prosecution under this code upon a charge involving the speed of a vehicle, any officer or other person shall be incompetent as a witness if the testimony is based upon or obtained from or by the maintenance or use of a speed trap.”

CVC 40805, Admission of Speed Trap Evidence, states:"Every court shall be without jurisdiction to render a judgment of conviction against any person for violation of this code involving the speed of a vehicle if the court admits any evidence or testimony secured in violation of, or which is inadmissible under this article."

I trust in the Court's fairness and ask that my citation be dismissed in the interest of justice.

If the court does not find in my favor in this case, I request a fine reduction and a Court assignment to attend traffic school.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.

Date: September 9, 2006

Meg Griffen
Defendant in Pro Per

kimletrim
10-24-2006, 09:40 AM
Blze, if you don't mind, I'd like to post what the law enforcement officer's declaration looks like. This will give TBDers an idea of what they are up against and to help them how to frame their defenses.

http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/forms/documents/tr235.pdf

nurb2
10-25-2006, 12:01 AM
That information would be better if it contained the officer's written declaration.
I understand they are attending special writing classes now a days....

See if you can scan the image of the pdf and post THAT. It'd be easier for people to read in case they don't have adobe loaded on their machines.

Good find,

Blaze

I've got one. I don't have a scanner though ... what the hell, I will type it out word for word, officer mistakes bolded and italicized, plus some personal comments: ;-)

December 2, 2004

Central Justice Center
P.O. Box 1138
Santa Ana, California 92702-1138
ATTN: Alan Slater, Deputy Clerk

Re: OR 933XXX / Trail by Declaration

Dear Officer of the Court,

I, Donald Fatty, am employed by the Orange Police Department as a Police Officer and have been so employed for the last thirteen years. I am currently assigned to the Traffic Division where my duties primarily include the enforcement of the state traffic laws and the investigation of traffic collisions. I have been assigned to the Traffic Division for the last six years.

On Sat July, 24,2004, at approximately 2:30 p.m., [Ticket said 3:30 p.m.] I was on duty, in uniform and on a marked police motorcycle. I was monitoring traffic speeds for east and westbound traffic for Collins Av approximately 400 feet west of Roberto, in the city limits of Orange. The posted speed limit for this section of roadway is posted at 35 MPH. A City of Orange Roadway Conditions Survey Summary, which was conducted in August 2003, shows the 85th percentile to be 39 MPH and the survey expires in August 2008. While parked on the south side of Collins Ave. I saw a blue colored 2003 Mitsubishi Evol Calif. License 5GESXXX traveling W/B Collins Ave., in the #1 lane of W/B traffic. I made a visual estimation of the vehicles speed of 55 MPH and then activated my vindicator radar gun (serial # 5275) at the subject vehicle, which displayed a speed of 54 MPH.

From my position of observation, I had a clear and unobstructed view of the vehicle as he continued to travel westbound on Collins Ave., past my position. The Mitsubishi passed another vehicle as it sped past [Nice dramatic effect], I then pulled out from my position after the Mitsubishi, activated my emergency lights, and followed the subject vehicle westbound Collins Ave. Due to the speed of the Mitsubishi I did not catch up with it until after it had turn north on Wanda Rd. [This is cop BS for dramatic effect. He lit me up as I was stopped at a red light at the corner before I turned.] The Mitsubishi finally [Yes, finally! 15 seconds later. LOL] yielded along the east curb line of Wanda Rd, a north/south street, approximately 800 feet north of Collins.

I contacted the driver of the Mitsubishi, who identified himself as Billy Joe Speeder by his California Driver's License. The registration on the vehicle showed Mr. Speeder as the registered owner of the vehicle.

July 1, 1999 [LOL. This is the start of page 2. The date sort of proves the officer uses the same template over and over, changing only the details.]

I asked Mr. Speeder if he knew why I had stopped him and he said "no." I asked if he knew what the speed limit on Collins was he said, "45." [Blatant lie. What I said was "Yes I do."]

I subsequently issued Mr. Speeder citation # ORC 933XXX for the violation of CVC 22350: Unsafe Speed. Mr Speeder signed the respective citation, promising to appear in court, and I gave him a copy.

This declaration and the statements herein are true to the best of my knowledge, having in mind the laws of the State of California, and the sworn oath of the Court.[This statement obviously means nothing. The cop lied for effect.]

Respectfully Submitted,

Corporal Donald E. Fatty #9XX
Police Officer

****************************
I lost this Trial By Declaration, despite the judge having a copy of the ticket with the time discrepancy, and despite the officer writing and punctuating like a moron. As you can see, the officers will lie and use dramatic effect to sway the judge.

The Trial De Novo was a different story, as I used this very declaration against him in court. It was humiliating for the officer, to say the least.

Remember, their declarations are public record, so you can always get them for use in your Trial De Novo ;-)

-nurb2-

Skiracer
07-22-2007, 11:11 PM
its hard to use CVC 40802(a)(2) for me .. the cop said he paced me . i guess my only argument is that i was withen the basic speed law. lol any ideas on this one? i am going to try to type it out tonight.


I respectfully submit this written declaration to the Court pursuant to CVC40902. I plead Not Guilty to the charge of violating CVC 22349(a).
The facts of my case are as follows: While driving northbound on Interstate 395, just south of CA-203., in moderate traffic on 1/12/2007 at approximately 10:15PM, I was stopped by Officer Baumann (Serial# 812) from the Sheriff’s Department and charged with violating CVC 22349(a), 80+ MPH in a 65mph zone.
I know that I was not traveling 80+mph and that my speed was safe and reasonable for conditions. I asked Officer Baumann if I could see his radar gun to see if I was traveling above 80+MPH, but Officer Baumann says he did not have a radar gun in his vehicle and he said that he had paced me. As such, I know that the officer’s paced guess was inaccurate. Also, there were several cars that passed me within minutes of my being stopped. At night, the officer could have easily mistaken any one of these speeders for my vehicle after they passed me, then switched into my lane, blocking the officer's view. It is possible he spotted another car from a distance, but lost sight of it in traffic as he sped up. This would be quite possible in the reduced visibility of night. There were certainly several cars that passed me in the minutes prior to the officer stopping me.
As a method of determining speed, pacing is notoriously inaccurate. Close pacing over an extended distance is the only reasonable way to mitigate the inaccuracies of pacing. I don't believe the officer's alleged "pace" is anything more that his speed of acceleration in coming up from behind me. He certainly was not behind me for long. At about 1/4 mile back, I saw him approach me rapidly and checked my speedometer. My speed was approximately 65 mph and I maintained my speed and lane to allow him to pass.
I know the number he cited is at least 15mph faster than I was driving. I expect the officer to provide proof of recent speedometer calibration for the court to even consider his speedometer reading as evidence. Please dismiss my case outright if the officer does not provide recent speedometer calibration data for the patrol vehicle Officer Baumann was driving on the night I was stopped. Without valid verification of speedometer calibration of the patrol vehicle used to stop me, my case should be dismissed for lack of evidence.
Ultimately, whatever the accuracy of his speedometer, his pace is still nothing more than the speed he was traveling. The relation of his speed to my speed is speculative, and in this case, quite inaccurate.
The officer failed to verify his speculation about my speed with any direct evidence, like radar. I know that my speed was approximately 65 when he was close behind me.
The officer’s case is based on multiple guesses. The officer’s first guess about my speed is based upon his own speed, possibly skewed higher by his acceleration. His second guess was that it was my vehicle he saw speeding from a distance. In traffic with low visibility due to darkness, it would be quite easy to lose sight of his initial target and confuse my car with the vehicle he first sighted. Considered together, the officer’s guesses cast far too much doubt on the accuracy of his evidence.
I don't believe that the officer's evidence is sufficient to sustain a conviction. Please dismiss my citation in the interest of justice. If the court does not find in my favor in this case, I request a fine reduction and a Court assignment to attend traffic school.
I declare under penalty of perjury that this statement is true and correct.

lost0138
07-22-2007, 11:19 PM
thanks :) that one helped me out, i was kinda stumped at the moment , hope this works.

heres what i am going to try. i will let you guys know if it worked, i took a little bit from different letters to put this one togethor. thanks for the help
john doe
Case No.: 1234

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing in regards to my trial by declaration.

I respectfully submit this written declaration to the Court pursuant to CVC40902. I plead Not Guilty to the charge of violating CVC 22350.
The Basic Speed Law, CVC 22350 states: "No person shall drive a vehicle upon a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable or prudent having due regard for weather, visibility, the traffic on, and the surface and width of the highway, and in no event at a speed which endangers the safety of persons or property."

At the time of my stop, the road was dry and clear with light traffic. On my citation, the officer marks that the traffic was "light." No persons or property were put at risk. As such, the Officer does not make a credible case that I was in violation of the Basic Speed Law.Officer Barslund also fails to note the Safe Speed for Imperial Highway in the appropriate space on my Notice to Appear. I know that I was traveling a Safe and Reasonable speed for conditions on Imperial Highway when I was stopped.

The facts of my case are as follows: While driving southbound on Imperial Hwy, just south of Placentia Ave, In light traffic on 3/05/2007 at approximately 2:01 AM .I was stopped by Officer Barslund (Serial# 1569) from the Brea Police Department and charged with violating CVC 22350 65 MPH in a 45mph zone.I know that I was not traveling 65mph and that my speed was safe and reasonable for conditions. I asked Officer Barslund if I could see his radar gun to see if I was traveling above 65MPH, but Officer Barslund says he did not have a radar gun in his vehicle and he said that he had paced me. As such, I know that the officer’s paced guess was inaccurate. Also, I don't believe the officer's alleged "pace" is anything more that his speed of acceleration in coming up from behind me. He certainly was not behind me for long. At about 1/4 mile back , I saw him approach me rapidly and checked my speedometer. My speed was approximately 45mph and I maintained my speed and lane to allow him to pass.I know the number he cited is at least 20mph faster than I was driving. I expect the officer to provide proof of recent speedometer calibration for the court to even consider his speedometer reading as evidence. Please dismiss my case outright if the officer does not provide recent speedometer calibration data for the patrol vehicle Officer Barslund was driving on the night I was stopped. Without valid verification of speedometer calibration of the patrol vehicle used to stop me, my case should be dismissed for lack of evidence .Ultimately, whatever the accuracy of his speedometer, his pace is still nothing more than the speed he was traveling. The relation of his speed to my speed is speculative, and in this case, quite inaccurate. The officer failed to verify his speculation about my speed with any direct evidence, like radar. I know that my speed was approximately 45 when he was close behind me.The officer’s case is based on multiple guesses. The officer’s first guess about my speed is based upon his own speed, possibly skewed higher by his acceleration. His second guess was that it was my vehicle he saw speeding from a distance. In traffic alhough light but low visibility due to darkness, it would be quite easy to lose sight of his initial target and confuse my car with the vehicle he first sighted. Considered together, the officer’s guesses cast far too much doubt on the accuracy of his evidence.I don't believe that the officer's evidence is sufficient to sustain a conviction. Please dismiss my citation in the interest of justice. If the court does not find in my favor in this case, I request a fine reduction and a Court assignment to attend traffic school.
I declare under penalty of perjury that this statement is true and correct.

Skiracer
01-12-2009, 11:24 PM
HOW TO: FIGHT A PARKING TICKET WHEN NO PARKING SIGN IS NOT POSTED IN A "CONSPICUOUS PLACE"

Applies to City of Los Angeles, but could apply to other cities/agencies:

http://www.lacity-parking.org/laopm/contest.htm

Service: Contesting a Ticket
Description: Contesting a ticket is a three-step process
Administrative Review
Administrative Hearing
Appeal

Telephone: Please call the number below to request an Administrative Review.

or
Mail: Please send a letter to the address below to request an Administrative Review. Please state the grounds upon which you are contesting the ticket. Write the citation number on the letter or refrence the received citation.
You MUST contest your citation within 21 days of the date the ticket was issued, or 14 days from the date on the first overdue notice.

Phone (866)561-9742
TTY: (213)623-7046
Mail Correspondence: City of Los Angeles
P.O. Box 30247
Los Angeles, CA. 90030-0968



My Administrative Review i wrote thru the mail:

August 1, 2008
Attachment: 1
City of Los Angeles-Parking Violations Bureau Initial Review Request

For defendant:
Skiracer
1111 Crenshaw Blvd.
Los Angeles, CA
Citation# 123456789

To Whom It May Concern:

I am contesting the citation number listed above which I received on 8/1/2008 at 8:03AM which my car was parked at or near “X2405 Crenshaw Blvd.” according to the citation.

Attached photograph A shows a sign 30-40 feet East of my parking location stating “No Parking 8 to 12 Noon Thursdays Only Street Sweeping”, but the sign is obscured by tree branches and leaves and was not in a “conspicuous” location as CVC 22507.6 states below and can only be read when you move the tree branches and leaves.

CVC 22507.6 states, “Local authorities may, by ordinance or resolution, prohibit or restrict the parking or standing of vehicles on designated streets or highways, or portions thereof, for the purpose of street sweeping…No such ordinance or resolution shall be effective until the street or highway, or portion thereof, has been sign-posted in accordance with the uniform standards and specifications of the Department of
Transportation, or local authorities have caused to be posted in a CONSPICUOUS place at each entrance to the street a notice not less than 17 inches by 22 inches in size, with lettering not less than one inch in height, setting forth the day or days and hours parking
is prohibited.”

Attached photograph B shows a close up shot of the No Parking sign covered by tree branches and leaves and is clearly not in a conspicuous location.

The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines the word “conspicuous” as:
1 : obvious to the eye or mind <conspicuous changes>
2 : attracting attention : striking <a conspicuous success>
3 : marked by a noticeable violation of good taste
Synonyms: see Noticeable
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/conspicuous

I am requesting my ticket be dismissed on the grounds that the No Parking Sign was not in a conspicuous/obvious location per CVC 22507.6 and not clearly visible from the street due to tree branches and leaves obscuring the visibility of the sign.

Regards,





Skiracer

lakerraider
01-23-2009, 06:28 PM
can i send in a TBD before i recieve a courtesy notice or must i wait until i recieve one (to know the amount of bail to include with the TBD)?

Blaze
01-23-2009, 06:47 PM
can i send in a TBD before i recieve a courtesy notice or must i wait until i recieve one (to know the amount of bail to include with the TBD)?


It's best if you wait.

If you send in the paperwork or walk into the clerks office before the department has submitted their paperwork, the courts will have no record of you. If the TBD is not paired with a case, it could be discarded. Eventually this would lead to your FTA (failure to appear) and a bench warrant.

fly_$ociety
08-04-2009, 09:33 PM
So guys... I got a ticket going 55mph in a 45mph zone . He didnt get me on radar, so i am basically fighting his judgement of his visual estimation of my traveling speed. He also mention that traffic was medium, but it was actually super light cuz it was 1am. Gimme some idea....thanks

kungfudevil
08-31-2009, 02:45 PM
Anyone got one of these for a speeding ticket that was caught with a laser gun? :?

FreddysEvolutionIX
09-02-2009, 09:21 PM
i think im gonna need help Blaze!!!

dastallion951
09-02-2009, 09:27 PM
freddy ive fought every ticket by TBD n won all except one, but in my opinion i didnt win that one becuz i submitted 2 TBD for different infractions in the same day and they were both read by the same judge....ftmfl....but yea let me know if u need any help

FreddysEvolutionIX
09-02-2009, 09:34 PM
fo sho, im expected to show up on 10/1/09 for it. i wanna get started on it early.

dastallion951
09-02-2009, 09:42 PM
first thing freddy if u plan to fight it by TBD, by time on ur court case, go to the court about 2 weeks prior to the day and say u need to get an extension, i believe ur allowed 1 or 2 2 month extensions....n then use in this law enforcement section on how to write one, change all the info to ur specific case....n change some wording around that be it....but with TBD u need to pay ur bail amount in full then ull get a letter in the mail shortly after the judge read both sides as to the verdict, now even if u lose in the TBD u can request to go to traffic school if u lose, then that way ur good....
let me know if u need any more help big homie

FreddysEvolutionIX
09-02-2009, 09:51 PM
thanks son. that info helps alot

imprezivevo
12-07-2009, 10:45 PM
This is one of my more recent TBDs. It's based on the old one, and is currently being used to fight a ticket involving an aircraft. Thanks to several members for helping me out with this.

Blaze

Example 6


STATEMENT OF FACTS

Defendant's Name: Meg Griffen
Case No.: 93263BV

I respectfully submit this written declaration to the Court pursuant to CVC 40902. I plead Not Guilty to the charge of violating CVC 22349.

The facts of my case are as follows: While driving on I5 on 05-04-06, I was stopped by a CHP Officer (I.D.#15353) and was charged with violating CVC 22349. The Officer has alleged that I was driving 85mph in a 65mph zone based on Aircraft evidence. I believe that I was driving approximately 70mph at the time of my stop and that my speed was quite safe for the prevailing conditions.

The Basic Speed Law, CVC 22350 states: "No person shall drive a vehicle upon a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable or prudent having due regard for weather, visibility, the traffic on, and the surface and width of the highway, and in no event at a speed which endangers the safety of persons or property."

At the time of my stop, the road was dry and clear with light traffic. No persons or property were put at risk.

Further, I believe that the method in which my speed was evaluated is subject to error and, may constitute an illegal Speed Trap pursuant to CVC 40802(a)(2).

40801. States that “No peace officer or other person shall use a speed trap in arresting, or participating or assisting in the arrest of, any person for any alleged violation of this code nor shall any speed trap be used in securing evidence as to the speed of any vehicle for the purpose of an arrest or prosecution under this code.”

40802. (a) Describes a "speed trap" as “A particular section of a highway measured as to distance and with boundaries marked, designated, or otherwise determined in order that the speed of a vehicle may be calculated by securing the time it takes the vehicle to travel the known distance.”

40803. (a) “No evidence as to the speed of a vehicle upon a highway shall be admitted in any court upon the trial of any person in any prosecution under this code upon a charge involving the speed of a vehicle when the evidence is based upon or obtained from or by the maintenance or use of a speedtrap.”

40804. (a) “In any prosecution under this code upon a charge involving the speed of a vehicle, any officer or other person shall be incompetent as a witness if the testimony is based upon or obtained from or by the maintenance or use of a speed trap.”

CVC 40805, Admission of Speed Trap Evidence, states:"Every court shall be without jurisdiction to render a judgment of conviction against any person for violation of this code involving the speed of a vehicle if the court admits any evidence or testimony secured in violation of, or which is inadmissible under this article."

I trust in the Court's fairness and ask that my citation be dismissed in the interest of justice.

If the court does not find in my favor in this case, I request a fine reduction and a Court assignment to attend traffic school.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.

Date: September 9, 2006

Meg Griffen
Defendant in Pro Per



Hay blaze, any word on if this one worked? i wanna try to use it, plus it was a speedtrap

FUEL
12-07-2009, 10:55 PM
It will work. I've used the examples posted here 3 times... And won all 3 times.

Dead_Pirate
12-07-2009, 11:00 PM
I love you blaze for this info! No homo


I'm printing this shit out just in case if the Internet goes out of business...lol

imprezivevo
12-08-2009, 12:37 PM
thanks for the info! really does help

tinyt288
12-09-2009, 04:24 PM
Can someone PLEASE help me.... just received a notice of traffic violation in the mail. I got nailed by a stupid camera for a right turn. Violation says "failure to stop at red light". But the pictures they sent me clearly shows that my break lights were on. I can't believe this bullshxt costs $446.00, it's not like I committed murder! Ugh City of Walnut must be poor... but anyway... so how do I fight this? I wasn't pulled over by a cop or anything. Does anyone have any Trial by Declaration templates I can use for my situation? =( I can't believe they would do this to me right before Christmas, I'm broke already!! Someone please help me ~! Please??

obstacle1
12-09-2009, 04:44 PM
Can someone PLEASE help me.... just received a notice of traffic violation in the mail. I got nailed by a stupid camera for a right turn. Violation says "failure to stop at red light". But the pictures they sent me clearly shows that my break lights were on. I can't believe this bullshxt costs $446.00, it's not like I committed murder! Ugh City of Walnut must be poor... but anyway... so how do I fight this? I wasn't pulled over by a cop or anything. Does anyone have any Trial by Declaration templates I can use for my situation? =( I can't believe they would do this to me right before Christmas, I'm broke already!! Someone please help me ~! Please??
I recently got the same violation but by a Officer 21453 (C)?. Just ask for a extension if you dont want to sacrafice your Holiday money. I currently don't have a TBD template but I'm working on one. Mine is due in February!

tinyt288
12-09-2009, 06:03 PM
ugh... my bail is due Jan. 14 but if I request for a Trial by Declaration, the due date is Jan. 7!!!! What do I do? request for an extension first? Will they still allow me to request for a TBD then?

obstacle1
12-09-2009, 07:00 PM
ugh... my bail is due Jan. 14 but if I request for a Trial by Declaration, the due date is Jan. 7!!!! What do I do? request for an extension first? Will they still allow me to request for a TBD then?
Yes, you're still eligible for Trial by Declaration if you request a extension. Thats what I'm doing. You have to pay the bail amount first then receive TBD forms. You may also download the forms from the Los Angeles suprior court website.
Just show up to the clerks office and ask for a extension.

tinyt288
12-09-2009, 07:15 PM
hmm.. i requested for an extension online till March 15, but i went back in to check the status and it still says TBD is due Jan. 7...I'm confused... does that mean i HAVE to appear in court now???

obstacle1
12-14-2009, 10:53 AM
hmm.. i requested for an extension online till March 15, but i went back in to check the status and it still says TBD is due Jan. 7...I'm confused... does that mean i HAVE to appear in court now???
No you dont. Just go back on the 15th of March with your full bail amount and your TBD.

dastallion951
12-14-2009, 03:06 PM
got one used trial by declaration many times...always worked till this time.....now can u ask for the document on the officers side as to what happened???

obstacle1
12-14-2009, 03:44 PM
got one used trial by declaration many times...always worked till this time.....now can u ask for the document on the officers side as to what happened???
I don't think so lol. I will try next year, My TBD is due in February.

YGWolf27
01-16-2010, 12:04 AM
Great info, I could have used this when I was in my civic.. 96 in a 25 is what i was clocked for, She had someone else pulled over, I was in 2nd gear shifting into 3rd, no way I was doing 96 in second lol.. 550~ Fine after everything added up.

Doctor Evo
01-25-2010, 04:05 PM
Just used one of these and beat my ticket from Claremont PD. THANKS!!!!

Blaze
01-25-2010, 05:09 PM
Hay blaze, any word on if this one worked? i wanna try to use it, plus it was a speedtrap


This one was a confirmed win.
However, the officer did not contest it.

But like Vin Diesel says, "It doesn't matter you win by a FTA or at trial. Winning's winning."

tinyt288
01-28-2010, 12:25 PM
Hey guys, how long after you submit your TBD do you get a response from the courts?? I submitted mine on 1/6 but they still have not responded!!!! should I give them a call?

obstacle1
01-28-2010, 12:32 PM
Hey guys, how long after you submit your TBD do you get a response from the courts?? I submitted mine on 1/6 but they still have not responded!!!! should I give them a call?
It should take around one month.

Ralli_Flip_09
01-31-2010, 11:24 PM
ok guys ive used one of this letters to the court now it appears that i have a court date do i need to appear in my court date or just ignore it? please help

Blaze
02-01-2010, 09:44 AM
When you submit your TBD to the clerk, they will give you copies of the paperwork.* Somewhere in your paperwork, you will find a hearing date or court date.* This is the day on which the judge will read your declaration and review any attached evidence.

You would not need to appear for this.* Not appearing is the main reason people do a TBD.

If you did not submit a TBD, or you have a ticket that states "MANDATORY APPEARANCE" then you may want to check with the clerk in traffic court to see what's up.

hardcoreracing
02-01-2010, 10:12 AM
Can someone PLEASE help me....* just received a notice of traffic violation in the mail.* I got nailed by a stupid camera for a right turn.* Violation says "failure to stop at red light".* But the pictures they sent me clearly shows that my break lights were on.* I can't believe this bullshxt costs $446.00, it's not like I committed murder!* Ugh City of Walnut must be poor... but anyway... so how do I fight this?* I wasn't pulled over by a cop or anything.* Does anyone have any Trial by Declaration templates I can use for my situation? =(* I can't believe they would do this to me right before Christmas, I'm broke already!! Someone please help me ~!* Please??

Good luck fighting this.* My ex tried to fight this in court.* It doesn't matter if your brake lights were on or not, you have to stop for a specified number of seconds before moving.

evolutong
02-01-2010, 10:20 AM
Thank you. Great info.

Blaze
02-01-2010, 02:33 PM
Can someone PLEASE help me....* just received a notice of traffic violation in the mail.* I got nailed by a stupid camera for a right turn.* Violation says "failure to stop at red light".* But the pictures they sent me clearly shows that my break lights were on.* I can't believe this bullshxt costs $446.00, it's not like I committed murder!* Ugh City of Walnut must be poor... but anyway... so how do I fight this?* I wasn't pulled over by a cop or anything.* Does anyone have any Trial by Declaration templates I can use for my situation? =(* I can't believe they would do this to me right before Christmas, I'm broke already!! Someone please help me ~!* Please??

Good luck fighting this.* My ex tried to fight this in court.* It doesn't matter if your brake lights were on or not, you have to stop for a specified number of seconds before moving.


It's not impossible. I beat one of these last year for my girl. The only thing that seems really impossible to beat are the REF tickets. And even THOSE can be won if you try hard enough.

Ralli_Flip_09
02-01-2010, 06:40 PM
thnx BLAZE so after they had reviewed my case how long would it take for me to wait if i won or lose?

Blaze
02-02-2010, 08:58 AM
thnx BLAZE so after they had reviewed my case how long would it take for me to wait if i won or lose?


Your should get a notice withing 7-10 days of the ruling. Then up to 90 days for a refund. If you lose, make certain you file an appeal.

Ralli_Flip_09
02-02-2010, 06:36 PM
thnx BLAZE so after they had reviewed my case how long would it take for me to wait if i won or lose?


Your should get a notice withing 7-10 days of the ruling. Then up to 90 days for a refund. If you lose, make certain you file an appeal.


when i file an appeal will the deputy show up? also do i have to file an appeal can i just discard it what would happend if i donT show up? sorry for all this question im just nervous thats why i have 2 weeks to go

J-VO
02-03-2010, 05:27 PM
i wonder if u can do this for a ticket from a camera. other day my battery died and i crossed the crosswalk a bit but did not run the red. camera still flashed and took pics... but this has happened to my dad before and he didn't get a ticket.

JOOTZ
02-03-2010, 06:09 PM
great info, thanks for taking the time.

Ralli_Flip_09
02-05-2010, 07:08 PM
hey there blaze since the court has already reviewed my case they have sent me a document stating that i have a 12 hour schooling. would i still be able to get my bail refunded?

Blaze
02-08-2010, 08:11 AM
hey there blaze since the court has already reviewed my case they have sent me a document stating that i have a 12 hour schooling. would i still be able to get my bail refunded?


You wouldn't need to go to traffic school if you won your case.
You should go back and re-read the judgment/verdict.

example:

http://www.socalevo.net/gallery/albums/userpics/10569/page2.jpg

Ralli_Flip_09
02-08-2010, 11:46 PM
hey blaze mine has a check on guilty box and a check on the granted permission to attend 12hr traffic school. does this mean if i attend this will the points come off my record?

Blaze
02-09-2010, 08:20 AM
*sigh* Yes, that's typically how it works....

If it were me, I'd file an appeal and get a new trial though.
But if it's easier for you, you can just pay for traffic school and the points will be off your record.
(until next time)

Ralli_Flip_09
02-13-2010, 09:57 PM
thanx allot blaze hope you wont see me in this forum again lol thanx again

evol8
02-17-2010, 11:07 AM
step 1 complete.... lol now to wait a little

evol8
02-18-2010, 04:45 PM
problem is that i was clocked at 52 in a 25 constuction zone with medium traffic what do i do????

Residue
02-20-2010, 12:57 AM
Anyone happen to have successfully fought a VC 22356(b): "No person shall drive a vehicle upon that highway at a speed greater than 70 miles per hour, as posted."

Got popped by a CHP in BFE central cali (Fresno) on January 17. The ticket shows a schedule court date of April 13th. I have not received any notice in the mail, and upon inspecting my ticket closely just now, I noticed he did not check off the "To be notified" box, so I guess I am going to have to call the court personally to find out the bail amount.

I imagine I could probably combine some info towards mine from the CVC 22350 violations, however if someone happens to have something in regards to my violation, I would appreciate the assistance!

EvoCousin
02-21-2010, 12:26 AM
wow this is a very helpful topic.. i got a stupid unsafe start recently.. wish i wouldve know about this stuff earlier

SIXXSPD
02-28-2010, 05:05 AM
any one who got a template of "camera red light" and fought it TBD?
i got flashed last night at south st and gridley in cerritos.

thanks!

panda
04-11-2010, 08:53 PM
Hey Blaze just wondering but do you know if I could do a T.B.D. for a 22348(b)vc and a 21658(a)vc? The violations are speeds over 100 (was on the freeway) and unsafe lane change respectively. Dumb decision on my choice I know but Im just trying to see what my options are here. There is more detailed info in the thread I made if you wanted to know more.

TruSlide
04-22-2010, 05:52 PM
^you got to be very careful with your wording if you do a TBD. especially since your description in the other thread stated you took the "opportunity" to cut over... I think you might be able to win the 22348(b) but might just have to bite the bullet on the 21658(a). traffic school for the unsafe lane change but at least combined you wont get any points and for unsafe lane change it shouldn't be expensive...

HeartBeatMotoR
06-15-2010, 04:44 PM
its hard to use CVC 40802(a)(2) for me .. the cop said he paced me . i guess my only argument is that i was withen the basic speed law. lol any ideas on this one? i am going to try to type it out tonight.


I respectfully submit this written declaration to the Court pursuant to* CVC40902. I plead Not Guilty to the charge of violating CVC 22349(a).
The facts of my case are as follows:* While driving northbound on Interstate 395, just south of CA-203., in moderate traffic on 1/12/2007 at approximately 10:15PM, I was stopped by Officer Baumann (Serial# 812) from the Sheriff’s Department and charged with* violating CVC 22349(a), 80+ MPH in a 65mph zone.
I know that I was not traveling 80+mph and that my speed was safe and reasonable for conditions.* I asked Officer Baumann if I could see his radar gun to see if I was traveling above 80+MPH, but Officer Baumann says he did not have a radar gun in his vehicle and he said that he had paced me.* As such, I know that the officer’s paced guess was inaccurate. Also, there were several cars that passed me within minutes of my being stopped. At night, the officer could have easily mistaken any one of these speeders for my vehicle after they passed me, then switched into my lane, blocking the officer's view.* It is possible he spotted another car from a distance, but lost sight of it in traffic as he sped up. This would be quite possible in the reduced visibility of night. There were certainly several cars that passed me in the minutes prior to the officer stopping me.
As a method of determining speed, pacing is notoriously inaccurate. Close pacing over an extended distance is the only reasonable way to mitigate the inaccuracies of pacing. I don't believe the officer's alleged "pace" is anything more that his speed of acceleration in coming up from behind me. He certainly was not behind me for long. At about 1/4 mile back, I saw him approach me rapidly and checked my speedometer. My speed was approximately 65 mph and I maintained my speed and lane to allow him to pass.
I know the number he cited is at least 15mph faster than I was driving. I expect the officer to provide proof of recent speedometer calibration for the court to even consider his speedometer reading as evidence. Please dismiss my case outright if the officer does not provide recent speedometer calibration data for the patrol vehicle Officer Baumann was driving on the night I was stopped. Without valid verification of speedometer calibration of the patrol vehicle used to stop me, my case should be dismissed for lack of evidence.
Ultimately, whatever the accuracy of his speedometer, his pace is still nothing more than the speed he was traveling. The relation of his speed to my speed is speculative, and in this case, quite inaccurate.
The officer failed to verify his speculation about my speed with any direct evidence, like radar.* I know that my speed was approximately 65 when he was close behind me.
The officer’s case is based on multiple guesses. The officer’s first guess about my speed is based upon his own speed, possibly skewed higher by his acceleration. His second guess was that it was my vehicle he saw speeding from a distance. In traffic with low visibility due to darkness, it would be quite easy to lose sight of his initial target and confuse my car with the vehicle he first sighted. Considered together, the officer’s guesses cast far too much doubt on the accuracy of his evidence.
I don't believe that the officer's evidence is sufficient to sustain a conviction. Please dismiss my citation in the interest of justice.* If the court does not find in my favor in this case, I request a fine reduction and a Court assignment to attend traffic school.
I declare under penalty of perjury that this statement is true and correct.


Did a version of this. Long Beach Court found me Guilty. Now what do I do? Request another trial?

Blaze
06-15-2010, 08:52 PM
Did a version of this. Long Beach Court found me Guilty. Now what do I do? Request another trial?


Did you read the full "how to" or just copy paste one of the examples?

Paragraph 5: http://www.socalevo.net/forum/index.php?topic=10663.msg148288#msg148288

HeartBeatMotoR
06-24-2010, 11:42 AM
Did a version of this. Long Beach Court found me Guilty. Now what do I do? Request another trial?


Did you read the full "how to" or just copy paste one of the examples?

Paragraph 5:* http://www.socalevo.net/forum/index.php?topic=10663.msg148288#msg148288


I read the full "how to", pm'd you a draft, you made suggestions, I made changes in line with your suggestions and then submitted the TBD to the greedy city of Long Beach.

Not looking to blame anyone for my loss as I realize this TBD "how to" isn't a guaranteed win. I'm just trying to figure out what I should do next in hopes of salvaging my case and posted here so others will know what to do should they also lose a TBD.

=================================

Believe this should be my next course of action:


if you lose, you are entitled to a new trial per Section 40902(d) of the California Vehicle Code. This gives you two chances to win.


In theory, if you lose the trial by declaration, you get a trial de novo, meaning all things are new. The judge should not hold the trial by declaration against you. If the judge denies you traffic school because of the trial by declaration, point out that you are not there for that trial, but, per CVC 40902(d), a trial de novo. You can also point to Vehicle Code section 42005 and People v Wozniak which say you can still have traffic school even after a conviction.

In reality, the courts make more money if you go to traffic school. Odds are the judge will let you go to traffic school if there is any way he/she can.

http://www.helpigotaticket.com/declar/index.html

Blaze
06-26-2010, 08:11 PM
I didn't think you were pointing blame. Just wanted to make certain you were aware that you can appeal under 40902(d).

HeartBeatMotoR
07-01-2010, 10:42 AM
I didn't think you were pointing blame. Just wanted to make certain you were aware that you can appeal under 40902(d).


Yes, I'm going to appeal and post here afterward. Thanks for all your help Blaze. 8)

dustin06MR
07-01-2010, 12:39 PM
hey blaze... how do you feel about using the "officer baumann" template for an 80 in a 65 on I-15 during moderate traffic? I was going with the flow of traffic as it was truthfully a bit above "moderate" and i noticed the officer float up on my bumper from the CAR POOL lane!!! he said he was off my "left clip" and judged my speed to be 80mph. He literally floated up on my bumper, turn on his lights and sirens too... pulled me over i was polite, (in uniform too), and the only real conversation he offered was the "left clip" detail, "license,proof of insurance", and how to merge back on the freeway...nice guy...not... I'm definitely trying the TBD but if you have an example more fitting let me know! this was a cop profiling me due to my car and ticketing me for the speed traffic was going. I really need to lose the big spoiler....

Blaze
07-01-2010, 02:05 PM
Going with the flow of traffic is not a viable defense. It's more like an admission of guilt.

You need to fully understand the nature of the specific citation(s) you are being charged with before you mount a defense and build your case. Remember, the officers conduct is not on trial and you won't get any sympathy if you were not treated with respect. So just stick to the facts of the case and don't clutter up your TBD with assumptions or lengthy explainations.



hey blaze... how do you feel about using the "officer baumann" template for an 80 in a 65 on I-15 during moderate traffic? I was going with the flow of traffic as it was truthfully a bit above "moderate" and i noticed the officer float up on my bumper from the CAR POOL lane!!! he said he was off my "left clip" and judged my speed to be 80mph. He literally floated up on my bumper, turn on his lights and sirens too... pulled me over i was polite, (in uniform too), and the only real conversation he offered was the "left clip" detail, "license,proof of insurance", and how to merge back on the freeway...nice guy...not... I'm definitely trying the TBD but if you have an example more fitting let me know! this was a cop profiling me due to my car and ticketing me for the speed traffic was going. I really need to lose the big spoiler....

dustin06MR
07-02-2010, 08:46 AM
Going with the flow of traffic is not a viable defense. It's more like an admission of guilt.

You need to fully understand the nature of the specific citation(s) you are being charged with before you mount a defense and build your case. Remember, the officers conduct is not on trial and you won't get any sympathy if you were not treated with respect. So just stick to the facts of the case and don't clutter up your TBD with assumptions or lengthy explainations.



hey blaze... how do you feel about using the "officer baumann" template for an 80 in a 65 on I-15 during moderate traffic? I was going with the flow of traffic as it was truthfully a bit above "moderate" and i noticed the officer float up on my bumper from the CAR POOL lane!!! he said he was off my "left clip" and judged my speed to be 80mph. He literally floated up on my bumper, turn on his lights and sirens too... pulled me over i was polite, (in uniform too), and the only real conversation he offered was the "left clip" detail, "license,proof of insurance", and how to merge back on the freeway...nice guy...not... I'm definitely trying the TBD but if you have an example more fitting let me know! this was a cop profiling me due to my car and ticketing me for the speed traffic was going. I really need to lose the big spoiler....

I understand that, but I was simply asking if that was a good template since we all know this thread is to help people who ARE guilty of speeding find a way around it. I was not going to add anything about the flow of traffic. His attitude, etc... Simply pointing out he was a doushe. Feel free to PM me any advice regarding this as I am going to use the TBD for sure.

Blaze
07-02-2010, 10:48 AM
Courts have been finding more people guilty by TBD now than they have in the past.

Anyone know if there is a way to obtain a copy of what the officer responded with?


They are now using templates similar to the ones we've posted here.
There's is an example a few pages back.

But it's okay. The TBD is just the easiest way out of a ticket.
Invest a little more time and there are other ways (just as effective) to have your case dismissed.

obstacle1
07-02-2010, 11:07 AM
Courts have been finding more people guilty by TBD now than they have in the past.

Anyone know if there is a way to obtain a copy of what the officer responded with?


They are now using templates similar to the ones we've posted here.
There's is an example a few pages back.

But it's okay. The TBD is just the easiest way out of a ticket.
Invest a little more time and there are other ways (just as effective) to have your case dismissed.
What "other ways" Blaze?!!? :D

Doctor Evo
07-28-2010, 10:55 AM
Has anyone successfully beaten a rolling stop sign violation? I got careless in my small hometown of Acton and a Highway patrol officer in the middle of no where saw me.

Help Please?!?!

HeartBeatMotoR
08-11-2010, 09:52 AM
I didn't think you were pointing blame.* Just wanted to make certain you were aware that you can appeal under 40902(d).


Yes, I'm going to appeal and post here afterward. Thanks for all your help Blaze.* 8)


Okay, just literally got out of court about 15 minutes ago. According to the Clerk, the officer had checked in but was on his way from the court in Compton. My court location was Long Beach. So I wasn't let go like the 25 or so people that went before me who's officers didn't show up. Just my luck.
Anyway, when the judge was through calling role and finished with his speech about how it might take forever to hear everyone's case but we would get it done in how ever many days it would take, he offered up a last chance for traffic school. I hesitantly stood up and said I was interested. I figured it was better than nothing and since the officer was still on his way, he couldn't object. The judge then told me to have a seat and after he confirmed enough time had gone by since the last time I went to traffic school. I then got my paperwork and was out of there.
Keep in mind, this ticket was given to me towards the end of last year and I've been fighting it ever since. I'm glad I did though and thank those who have contributed to this thread. Without the contributions, I probably would have had to pay the fine AND take the hit on my license.
And finally, good luck to those still fighting their tickets / cases. O0

Blaze
09-12-2010, 07:29 PM
Blaze (or anyone) do they give you a refund of your bail? If so how long did it usually takes for you to receive yours?


90 days or so. Could be sooner, could be later. Just depends how backed up they are.
When you get the check, it will be a refund of the full bail amount. They do not deduct for court fees....

518
10-12-2010, 03:27 PM
Courts have been finding more people guilty by TBD now than they have in the past.


I've noticed this, too.

Between 2000-2006, I've had 3 speeding tickets and 1 carpool lane that I've sucessfully fought and won using TBD. Since 2007, I have yet to win another trial for speeding @ 80mph on a 65 zone.

Blaze
01-25-2011, 08:43 PM
STATEMENT OF FACTS

Defendant's Name: Lois Griffen
Case No.: #######

I respectfully submit this written declaration to the Court pursuant to CVC 40902. I plead Not Guilty to the charge of violating CVC 22349(a).

The facts of my case are as follows: While driving on 210 on 08-17-10, I was stopped by a CHP Officer (I.D.#12988) and was charged with violating CVC 22349(a). The Officer has alleged that I was driving 86mph in a 65mph zone based on radar evidence. I believe that I was driving approximately 65-70mph at the time of my stop and that my speed was quite safe for the prevailing conditions.

On my citation, the officer fails to note any of these relevant conditions. I can attest that the road was dry with clear visibility at the time of my stop. The officer also fails to note the Safe Speed for the freeway in the appropriate space on my Notice to Appear. I know that I was traveling a Safe and Reasonable speed for conditions on Meade when I was stopped. No persons or property were put at risk.

The Basic Speed Law, CVC 22350 states: "No person shall drive a vehicle upon a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable or prudent having due regard for weather, visibility, the traffic on, and the surface and width of the highway, and in no event at a speed which endangers the safety of persons or property."

When using radar evidence, the prosecution is required to prove that the use of radar is not an illegal speed trap. Speed Trap Evidence 40803(b) states: "In any prosecution under this code of a charge involving the speed of a vehicle, where enforcement involves the use of radar or other electronic devices which measure the speed of moving objects, the prosecution shall establish, as part of its prima facie case, that the evidence or testimony presented is not based upon a speed trap as defined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 40802."

40801. States that “No peace officer or other person shall use a speed trap in arresting, or participating or assisting in the arrest of, any person for any alleged violation of this code nor shall any speed trap be used in securing evidence as to the speed of any vehicle for the purpose of an arrest or prosecution under this code.”

40802. (a) Describes a "speed trap" as “A particular section of a highway measured as to distance and with boundaries marked, designated, or otherwise determined in order that the speed of a vehicle may be calculated by securing the time it takes the vehicle to travel the known distance.”

40803. (a) “No evidence as to the speed of a vehicle upon a highway shall be admitted in any court upon the trial of any person in any prosecution under this code upon a charge involving the speed of a vehicle when the evidence is based upon or obtained from or by the maintenance or use of a speed trap.”

40804. (a) “In any prosecution under this code upon a charge involving the speed of a vehicle, any officer or other person shall be incompetent as a witness if the testimony is based upon or obtained from or by the maintenance or use of a speed trap.”

CVC 40805, Admission of Speed Trap Evidence, states:"Every court shall be without jurisdiction to render a judgment of conviction against any person for violation of this code involving the speed of a vehicle if the court admits any evidence or testimony secured in violation of, or which is inadmissible under this article."
The officer should provide documentary proof to the court that he successfully completed this radar operator course certified and approved by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training. If the officer does not submit proof with his declaration that he successfully completed this minimum 24-hour course in accordance with CVC40802(c)(1)(A), my case should be dismissed. His use of RADAR is not legal without this course, and his RADAR evidence is inadmissible. I urge the court to not accept hearsay testimony in lieu of documentary evidence to verify course completion. If the course was completed, documentary proof should be provided.

CVC40802(c)(1)(D) requires that: “The radar, laser, or other electronic device used to measure the speed of the accused meets or exceeds the minimal operational standards of the National Traffic Highway Safety Administration, and has been calibrated within the three years prior to the date of the alleged violation by an independent certified laser or radar repair and testing or calibration facility.”

The Officer should provide documentary proof that his RADAR meets or exceeds National Highway Traffic Administration Standards in accordance with CVC40802(c)(1)(D). At minimum, the officer should provide documents to the court proving that his RADAR has been calibrated within 3 years by an independent certified testing or calibration facility pursuant to CVC40802(c)(1)(D). If the officer cannot provide this evidence to the court, his RADAR evidence is inadmissible and my case should be dismissed.

I urge the court to not accept hearsay testimony in lieu of documentary evidence to verify required radar calibration. If the calibration was completed, documentary proof should be provided. Further, the officer should prove that the testing facility was certified and independent from the police department.

Finally, the officer must prove, pursuant to 40802 (c)(1)(C)(i) that he established prior to issuing my citation that his RADAR was properly calibrated within three years to NTHSA standards.

This standard is stated clearly in the code, which establishes that a conviction is not warranted unless the prosecution proved that, prior to the officer issuing the notice to appear, the arresting officer established that the radar, laser, or other electronic device conformed to the requirements of subparagraph (D). If the officer does not prove this standard, my case should be dismissed.

I trust in the Court's fairness and ask that my citation be dismissed in the interest of justice.

If the court does not find in my favor in this case, I request a fine reduction and a Court assignment to attend traffic school.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.

Date: January 25, 2011

Lois Griffen
Defendant in Pro Per

martinezusn
02-21-2011, 02:43 AM
just wondering for some input for wut to do. if i should to a TBD.??....so this is wut happened, i was at a stop light when i drove normally* down a two way street then came along a snake road and speed posted was 35MPH, i drove threw and noticed some jackass riding my ass so i punched it to get away from the guy and go figure i lost the car threw the snake road till couple seconds later 2 cop cars came flying behind me. i might of been around the speed i was accused of (65mph) . but as soon as i saw the lights i pulled over to the side, he asked why i was speeding i told him cuz some jackass was consistently* riding my ass , so i speed up. He said i was speeding and wen he came back he gave me a citation for UNSAFE SPEED 22350.
i was just wondering if there's any input. cuz i am active duty military and i do wana TBD just wondering wut would be luck if he did clock me at that speed, which i highly doubt cuz i took of quick . :laugh: :mitsu:

JayDub514
02-24-2011, 05:19 PM
How long are you guys waiting to hear back on your TBDs? Been a few months now for one of mine...

trenalsur
06-20-2011, 09:22 PM
I have a question.

First I need to pay the fine and request TBD on the summons by trial date? can it be postmarked? Its due 06/27

Second I need to wait for receipt of payment of fine? how long does this take?

Third I need to submitte form TR-205 withing 30 days of what date?

someone?

driver1
07-10-2011, 01:28 PM
Hi guys,

Thanks for the helpful forum, Ive learned a lot by reading this thread.
I got a VC 22349A last year on 07/14/10. Ticket said going 80+ on 65. At that time I didn't know about the way to fight the ticket. i just paid the fine and took an online traffic school.
I got the same ticket on 1/5/11. This time I belive the officer got me mistaken by other cars. I think I was going 70 on 65. I followed instruction on fighting the ticket, but unfortunatly I got a Guilty letter after trying the TWD. I already paid the fine, because I wil not be elligible for traffic school and have no choice except fight to the end. So, I prepared the form TR220 (Trial De Novo) and will send it in as late as possible, meanwile I want to get the declaration letter of the officer to prepare for the argument in the court. i also intend to go and visit the court and seat in one of those trials to get and idea on what to excpect. Please let me know of any advice you got if you were in my position before.

martinezusn
07-11-2011, 10:13 AM
just won my case by tbd!!! got all my money back and nothing on my record.

mugwump33
07-12-2011, 03:22 PM
WOW! GREAT thread guys -- this helps out a ton.

I got popped for going 110mph on I15 north in Barstow County. I'm writing my TBWD right now...
one interesting thing I noticed, is that the officer did not fill out the box that states whether he used laser, radar or followed me. It's just blank. What should I write?
does anybody know of any language in the vehicle code that says "an officer must provide you with evidence?" My due date is in 5 days, so is it too late to subpoena the officer for this?

I believe I'm innocent because I was using cruise control and going 80mph down a super long, super flat stretch of road. Any advice?


Thanks all.

mugwump33
07-13-2011, 12:34 AM
Anybody got any sexy language suggestions if the officer was pacing you?

dastallion951
07-14-2011, 01:18 PM
^ depends on how far behind you he was, and for how many miles? and if there were cars in lanes next to you and any behind you? anything that can disrupt clearview, and iirc he has to be pacing you for at least a mile or two.

bboy_RES
07-14-2011, 03:50 PM
Anybody got any sexy language suggestions if the officer was pacing you?


I just won my TBD and the officer was pacing me. I can show you what I wrote when I get home.

driver1
07-18-2011, 03:06 PM
I just got a copy of officer's Decleration. He basically says that he saw me from 1500 ft. away and I was 500 ft. behind a group of cars in lanes #2 and 3. He then visually estimated my speed to be 80 MPH, then I reached the group of cars and passed them. When I was 500 ft. away from him, he used the radar, it came up to 82MPH. The officer puts a wrong court name on his letter (a sign of just copy and paste).
I appreciate your comments.

mugwump33
08-06-2011, 04:09 PM
Hey Bboy_res, can you show me your language? I just got notice in the mail that I lost my trial... am filing for Trial De Novo.

martinezusn
08-06-2011, 10:09 PM
hey anyone know what to do for a damn redlight camera ticket???

i got a notice in the mail but it seems like it's a ''snitch ticket''. cuz it says'' do not contact the court '' lol kinda shady to me.

and it has a nice fill out section where it ask for your name and all your info lol

DTunedEvoX
08-21-2011, 10:55 PM
Writing my Trial By Written Declaration against 22349(a) VC - Exceeding Maximum Speed Limit of 65 MPH ... Turning it in tomorrow ... We'll see how it goes.

driver1
08-24-2011, 11:40 AM
I just got a copy of officer's Decleration. He basically says that he saw me from 1500 ft. away and I was 500 ft. behind a group of cars in lanes #2 and 3. He then visually estimated my speed to be 80 MPH, then I reached the group of cars and passed them. When I was 500 ft. away from him, he used the radar, it came up to 82MPH. The officer puts a wrong court name on his letter (a sign of just copy and paste).
I appreciate your comments.

My case was dismissed in court today. The officer didn't show up.
I prepared myself last week, printing pictures taken from location, calculating and making sketches based on officer's declaration and sitting in trial to listen.
It helped me to prepare, but I'm telling you, unless you have strong evidence, judges are teaming up with officers.
Based on officer's declaration, with my speed it would take 8 sec. to arrive where he clocked me, if assuming other cars in front of me were 500 ft. ahead of me and were driving at 65MPH, I couldn't have passed them. I made sketches showing locations of me, other cars, and officer's car in 0 time elapsed, 4 sec. elapsed and 8 sec. elapsed and could show that other cars have been in front or around me. BUT WHO CARES, I WON.
I'm just writing this, maybe it's helpful for somebody. I witnessed 2 judges ruling guilty for 12 persons. My judge even told us at the beginning, that "contrary to what you have read in internet, if the officer is not present, that doesn't mean you won".
He put my case to the last place (maybe hoping the officer appears), but at last he dismissed the case.

martinezusn
08-24-2011, 11:50 AM
Congrats sir

ccwballer
08-24-2011, 12:37 PM
If the officer doesnt show then yes you do win. It is called lack of prosecution.

DTunedEvoX
08-24-2011, 01:42 PM
Congrats! Guess I'll find out in 60 or so days for myself as well! lol

bboy_RES
08-24-2011, 02:37 PM
still waiting on the refund for my bail amount. it's been almost 2 months. they love taking their sweet time! haha.

driver1
08-24-2011, 10:38 PM
still waiting on the refund for my bail amount. it's been almost 2 months. they love taking their sweet time! haha.

I was told I will get my money in 4 weeks.

driver1
08-24-2011, 10:42 PM
If the officer doesnt show then yes you do win. It is called lack of prosecution.
Well, there was a pissed off guy in the court who told the judge this is the 3rd time the officer doesn't show up. The judge said the officer had once work injury and today he was on a collision scene and couldn't apear, so he postponded the trial.

ccwballer
08-25-2011, 08:09 AM
He definitely needs to review the law, or hire a traffic lawyer.

martinezusn
08-25-2011, 09:57 AM
still waiting on the refund for my bail amount. it's been almost 2 months. they love taking their sweet time! haha.

I was told I will get my money in 4 weeks.

Hey just FYI I waited almost 6weeks and didn't receive anything and when I went to the court house they said it is usually 4weeks but they checked and I was refuned the money the next day to my credit card. So if I was you I would call or show up to your local court house and ask about

el_blacky06
08-26-2011, 12:39 AM
Some of you guys got lucky but for me it was bad. I ended loosing my case even though the police officer didn't write his own side of the story.

DTunedEvoX
08-26-2011, 06:58 AM
Some of you guys got lucky but for me it was bad. I ended loosing my case even though the police officer didn't write his own side of the story.

Care to provide some details? Your experience would be a great asset to the thread if its as bad as you say.

revumbra
10-07-2011, 07:49 PM
Most of the information in this section is actually pretty good, but it misses the mark in a few locations. First, a major factor is WHO is conducting the traffic stop. When the officer comes up to your window, make sure to look at their shoulder patches. If you see something that looks like a wheel with wings on it, you are pretty much screwed. That is going to be a traffic unit with a majority of their job and training specifically pertaining to traffic offenses. If they are on a motorcycle, again a traffic unit. A traffic unit using radar/lidar also has to be adept at visually estimating speeds within 5mph of a vehicle, regardless of locaiton or direction of travel. These results of their estimation are usually on file with the court. A smart officer will document what they have you clocked (radar) at as well as their estimation. Due to their test results, their estimations are also admissable in court. In addition to all of this information, a large number of agencies also use video and audio recorders for the traffic stop. These are downloaded daily and usable in court for their declaration.

An easy way to avoid most of your traffic related issues is to not speed and have your vehicle meet the California Vehicle Code (CVC). Common traffic stops are for illegal front window tint, no front license plate, lights burned out, and modified lighting. Another good section to know is 2806 CVC as it deals with vehicle inspections (popping the hood). In reading it, please know the difference to what is probable cause and resonable suspicion.

el_blacky06
10-08-2011, 11:41 AM
Some of you guys got lucky but for me it was bad. I ended loosing my case even though the police officer didn't write his own side of the story.

Care to provide some details? Your experience would be a great asset to the thread if its as bad as you say.


Long story short, I did my own TBD (speeding on radar 60 on a 45 zone) and paid the fine upfront. Waited 3 months and I was found guilty. I did another trial to continue fighting the case since the officer didn't provide any paperwork stating his own side of the story. I got another statement that I was found guilty again and on the paper, it stated that the officer didn't provide the paperwork again so that didn't make any sense to me at that point

so_EVO
11-03-2011, 11:11 PM
Most of the information in this section is actually pretty good, but it misses the mark in a few locations. First, a major factor is WHO is conducting the traffic stop. When the officer comes up to your window, make sure to look at their shoulder patches. If you see something that looks like a wheel with wings on it, you are pretty much screwed. That is going to be a traffic unit with a majority of their job and training specifically pertaining to traffic offenses. If they are on a motorcycle, again a traffic unit. A traffic unit using radar/lidar also has to be adept at visually estimating speeds within 5mph of a vehicle, regardless of locaiton or direction of travel. These results of their estimation are usually on file with the court. A smart officer will document what they have you clocked (radar) at as well as their estimation. Due to their test results, their estimations are also admissable in court. In addition to all of this information, a large number of agencies also use video and audio recorders for the traffic stop. These are downloaded daily and usable in court for their declaration.

An easy way to avoid most of your traffic related issues is to not speed and have your vehicle meet the California Vehicle Code (CVC). Common traffic stops are for illegal front window tint, no front license plate, lights burned out, and modified lighting. Another good section to know is 2806 CVC as it deals with vehicle inspections (popping the hood). In reading it, please know the difference to what is probable cause and resonable suspicion.


Are you a cop bro? Cuz you sound like a cop

Anyway, despite your efforts to instill fear in people, fear not everyone. It is not the end of the world if you get pulled over by one those guys with "a wheel with wings on it" on their shoulder patch. I had a recent ticket cited by one of those CHP officers with wheels and wings and shit on their shoulder patches. I followed the TBD template found on this thread, along with added a little bit of my own information. Submitted everything on 10/27/11 ..... got a response from the court today actually 11/3/11 saying that my ticket has been dismissed and i will be receiving my refund in the mail within 60 days. SICKKKK!!!!

+1 to Blaze and this entire thread in General

714scene
03-30-2012, 03:22 PM
ive had 5 tickets in three years, i only paid for 2 of them. thank you trail by declaration

blkoutevo
05-04-2012, 02:54 PM
i just found out i won!! didnt come to a complete stop when making a right turn at a stop sign, but there was a truck in the middle lane impeding vision of cop so won!! woohoo

mky.og
05-25-2012, 03:41 PM
thanks for this info. will be putting it to use for a 49 in a 35 zone.

diego88
05-27-2012, 11:31 PM
hey a got a speeding ticket on my way to vegas before crossing the state line by the canyon where there are two bends and goes slighlty down hill just right before primm casino, i was going with the flow of traffic wich was about 90mph and 3-4 other cars ahead of me and a few more cars behind me as well. when i hit the second bend, i see a chp patrol stationary and saw his break light go on, reverse lights, and breaks again and start merging slowly into the freeway and i thought he was going after one of the cars ahead of me and (the chp is still within my view since i am behind of him) thats when i stepped on the breaks to slow down but i got it down to about 82. he was on the 3rd lane slowly taking his time reaching me,but by then i had already slowed down to about 70. then he turns on his lights and when im pulled over he said he got me on radar doing 90. i mean i was doing 90 but he was ahead of me so how could he have gotten my on radar? i want to do a tbd but wanted to ask if based on the info here if it sounds like a for sure case or better for me to just pay and request traffic school

BlueBooster
07-25-2012, 05:32 PM
The info in this thread has helped me maintain odds better than 50% chance of getting a ticket dismissed... Great stuff - never let the man get you down! Just got my bail of $450 back from a 22349(a) this week...

Name User
10-25-2012, 10:10 AM
Any odds at all with a TBD for a 49(a) written up as 95+?

Not that it matters but speed of traffic was 80-90 around 10pm 101 North of downtown, so naturally gotta push it just a liiiiiitle bit more.

CHP supposedly paced me, which I doubt because he had just come from the 110 onramp. I watched him merge behind me and saw no reason to slow down. At the time I was actually driving behind a different cop like 20 car lengths ahead of me. So in the end he just picked an obvious target and pulled a number out of his ass.

8YERV8
10-27-2012, 09:20 AM
"95+ MPH, saw him merge on behind me and saw no reason to slow down."???...Wow!

Name User
03-07-2013, 09:14 PM
Dismissed

On TBD all I wrote was "I am not guilty."

EricEvo2006
01-06-2014, 12:30 PM
Hey guys. I am in desperate need of your help! I was on my way to Lancaster around 7pm and highway patrol clocked me at 100mph. But the highway patrol officer was about 150ft-300ft ahead and facing the SAME direction I was. So i dont understand how he could have clocked me?
Regardless, I am doing a trial by declaration and I need advice on what I should write or what my excuse should be! I have til Feburary 10 til write it. Help me!

kambodianboi
01-06-2014, 01:09 PM
Hey guys. I am in desperate need of your help! I was on my way to Lancaster around 7pm and highway patrol clocked me at 100mph. But the highway patrol officer was about 150ft-300ft ahead and facing the SAME direction I was. So i dont understand how he could have clocked me?
Regardless, I am doing a trial by declaration and I need advice on what I should write or what my excuse should be! I have til Feburary 10 til write it. Help me!
hmm, did you pace him? or caught up to him? cause he can say he was going 80mph and you "somehow" closed the distance between him, which mean you were going faster than 80mph, and he could of exaggerated to say you did 100mph... lol? maybe?

but on the ticket, what is the violation code and method? radar? etc?

EricEvo2006
01-06-2014, 07:45 PM
hmm, did you pace him? or caught up to him? cause he can say he was going 80mph and you "somehow" closed the distance between him, which mean you were going faster than 80mph, and he could of exaggerated to say you did 100mph... lol? maybe?

but on the ticket, what is the violation code and method? radar? etc?

Code is 22349(a) Speeding over 65mph. And he was parked on the side of the road facing te same direction of me. But I saw him way ahead of time and slowed down to 63mph AT LEAST 100ft before I pasted him. He didn't even tell me anything. He said "license and reg., proof of insurance." went to his car and then came back and said "Sign here. This isn't admitting guilt blah blah blah." It was pitch black at that time because I was already in desert territory with no other cars around that I could have possibly put in "danger." I already ahve two points off my license and I can't get another haha. Now you know why I'm desperate!

EricEvo2006
01-06-2014, 07:46 PM
And it says Radar

EricEvo2006
01-13-2014, 11:44 PM
Anyone help!

kambodianboi
01-14-2014, 12:02 AM
Well, I did some research and people say that the CHP cars have both direction radar detection, and if your likely the only car on the road. It's pretty obvious.

Ref:
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110611193736AAFtv6V
http://forum.freeadvice.com/speeding-other-moving-violations-13/radar-speed-ticket-behind-police-car-347175.html

DeeezNuuuts83
05-30-2015, 06:39 AM
I got a speeding ticket (CHP) earlier this year and did everything as suggested, also with the assistance of my brother who also fought the exact same violation with a TBD. It looks like the ticketing officer responded, as I got paperwork saying I was guilty. (Interestingly the completely wrong citation number was on the form, though when I called to ask, the clerk said it was just a typo and didn't matter anyway since everything in their system pertaining to the citation and case shows the correct information.)

My question is this -- obviously I'd rather not have this on my record, so I might as well just take traffic school. Initially, the bail I posted was just the required amount (and not the higher of the two that included the fee for traffic school), so what do I do at this point? It doesn't look like there is a space for it on the TR-220, but can I request it on there and just send in a check for the difference? Or will I have to actually go to court and request it in person, THEN pay the difference? I'd rather not have to do that (since the ticket was in Ventura County and I live in Orange County so I'd basically have to take the day off of work), though I guess on the bright side, if I do go, then if the officer isn't present, I can win the new trial by default.

Thanks in advance.

Treyzian
05-30-2015, 10:32 AM
I learned, don't do or say anything which might imply that you were speeding when the officer stops you. Not even an "I'm sorry, I wasn't aware" and definitely not a "I was only going 5 over" or "Could you let me off with a warning?" Officer writes it down and puts it on the file as soon as he gets back in his car, and it completely screws your TBD.

You should request a Trial de Novo if you still have time, and then try to fight the ticket in person. If you still lose, request traffic school from the judge.

DeeezNuuuts83
05-30-2015, 12:15 PM
But my question is, do I have to request traffic school in person at court, or can I just say so in my Trial de Novo paperwork?

Treyzian
05-30-2015, 12:36 PM
When you got your TBD paperwork back, it should have said said your result, as well as if you were eligible for traffic school. If it did not say eligible for traffic school, you have to request it in person at a new trial (Trial de Novo) I believe.

You can write a letter to the judge requesting traffic school and hope that he or she approves it, but it would take a few weeks to process, and if it was denied, you would no longer be able to request a Trial de Novo.

Your safest option would be just to request a Trial de Novo.

DeeezNuuuts83
07-23-2015, 05:33 PM
I got a speeding ticket a few months ago.

Fought it via TBD using a template provided by my brother (almost the exact same thing, violation and location) but lost.

Send in Trial De Novo along with the difference in price for traffic school (since I had only paid the initial bail for the speeding ticket) along with a letter asking for traffic school.

Got the Trial De Novo approval but saying that I have to go to court.

Called the office and asked if I could just do traffic school, especially since they had cashed my check, but the lady said it was in trust (along with my original amount paid) and that I'd have to request it in court.

Went to court today (and it was a pain in the ass since I live in Orange County but had to go to Ventura County since that's where the incident was), and the ticketing officer wasn't there. Instant dismissal.

DeeezNuuuts83
10-28-2016, 10:00 AM
Is that your company? I'm guessing that's what CTF stands for.