Speeding ticket from scratch - Page 13

gregtu · #**121** 11-02-2004, 02:55 PM

BT, what's your take on not accepting their contract?

#**122** 11-02-2004, 03:13 PM

in the set of documents filed, the first two were an affidavit and a notice of opportunity to cure. the second set were a final notice of default, writ of mandamus, and motion to dismiss. i have uploaded these and hopefully they'll be approved soon. the title is Case CT07188 Documents.

i now need to construct the appeal documents, so will have to look up some rulesl, etc., and figure it out. this will be a de novo appeal, as it is an issue of law, and my only point will be the lack of subject matter jurisdiction as that's what counts.

jon

TheBlackTruth · #**123** 11-02-2004, 03:38 PM

I've just started a dialogue with some experienced legal minds regarding the choice of appeal vs. vacation/void of judgment.

I'll be interested to see what happens in your appeal. From what i know, in an appeal, they look for reversible error. If you don't give the judge the opportunity to rule, then there can be no error on ruling (absent an obvious abuse of constitutional rights).

In your list of documents, I don't see a Motion to Dismiss due to lack of SMJ and as such, has the judge really committed an error? Has SMJ been properly challenged?

You DO have facts on the record in the form of an unrebutted affidavit and that is great for going after a void judgment (where you can actually present new evidence as to SMJ)

Those are some of the things that are going through my head. I'm working on some things that I think will help establish as much reversible error as possible before the summary judgement - that way the appeal should be a slam dunk.

-BT

TheBlackTruth · #**124** 11-02-2004, 03:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gregtu

BT, what's your take on not accepting their contract?

Which contract are you referring to? The promise to appear? If so, I understand the concept of returning/refusing the contract, however, the facts don't support that this works 100% of the time and neither does case law. I think perhaps the times that it works is merely a representation of the minority of courts that just didn't want to bother with a case that fell outside of the margin of "normalcy".

-BT

#**125** 11-02-2004, 03:49 PM

the motion to dismiss is based upon the lack of smj. it is included in the doc list (i shortened the names). when you download the zip file you will see that in there...

jon

#**126** 11-02-2004, 03:51 PM

speaking of normalcy, my brother, a lawyer, states that judicial misconduct can really only be had when the judge obviously acts out of mailce, etc. in cases like this where smj is at stake, it is a routine thing for a judge to mess up. he even admits that more egregious errors are made, and he has cases containing them, but will not get judicial misconduct suites. the courts view this as part of the normal process of things. whereas obvious intent is a different story.

jon

TheBlackTruth · #**127** 11-02-2004, 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmunson

speaking of normalcy, my brother, a lawyer, states that judicial misconduct can really only be had when the judge obviously acts out of mailce, etc. in cases like this where smj is at stake, it is a routine thing for a judge to mess up. he even admits that more egregious errors are made, and he has cases containing them, but will not get judicial misconduct suites. the courts view this as part of the normal process of things. whereas obvious intent is a different story.

jon

<font color=darkblue face=verdana>

Agreed,

I stated the same thing in one of my replies here However, I have heard of suits against the state for malicious prosecution after you've had to defend against similar charges more than once.

-BT[/color]

KaosTheory · #**128** 11-02-2004, 10:10 PM

If you guys are serious about coming close to winning a traffic case, I would recommend the book Weis mentions "Adventures in Legal Land".

Here's an example. You would have something to appeal if the judge committed an error of the highest magnitude such as preventing you from cross examining the witness because "in the judge's own words" the witness is not competent to testify. Then when you ask if his whole testimony should be stricken (including the ticket) and the judge says no and finds you guilty anyway......well then you have something to appeal. The author of the book says this very situation happened to him. This is a mild situation compared some of the other situations mentioned. Check this out......even in the appeal, the judge looking over the transcript actually changed it to appear that the defendant never asked to cross examine the witness. How's that for due process?

gregtu · #**129** 11-02-2004, 10:34 PM

Would you guys agree that we're dealing with contract law?

#**130** 11-03-2004, 04:35 AM

well, if one is to subscribe fully to the beliefs on this board, then yes, we are dealing with contract law. however, as a result of the court system, i don't see that as yet...

so, my answer is that i lean towards the contract side, but, my reservation is that there is no proof positive of that just yet...

jon