UPDATE: Opening Brief filed, Preparing for Battle http://controllingtheinter.net/2018/02/27/traffic-court-cvc-22350-basic-speed-law-continued-appellants-opening-brief/ So, I’ll be posting as
I go through this process, I am working on getting this document for anyone who care’s to take interest in their own traffic adventures.
So I showed outside the trial court and I recongised the officer standing about. I peeked over and saw that he didn’t have any document on him other then one sheet of paper which was a citation he gave me during the stop. So instead of talking to him outside bartering for posting I ended up going to plan a proceeding to trial.
The first case is called a was an attorney versus a CHP officer. The attorney did the worst job I’ve ever seen representing someone in Case. He did not cross-examine any evidence or playing in evidence code to the documents officer was offering. He ended up scoring his clientsa $1000 fine, I’m sure that was on top of his fee for basically throwing in the towal.
The case was very short and after that he was called to go second, I’ll tell you after seeing that attorney perform i felt alot more confident.
One particular piece to note here, is the judge is correct in this case. I mistakingly use the federal rules of evidence instead of the California evidence code. State courts are not bound to federal rules of evidence, even the hearsay rule is redefined as California evidence code 1200. So a witness testifying as to being able to refresh his memory through your writing is not required just so long as the writing can be cross-examined per evidence code 771. I assume that taking time like this officer did just goes towards his credibility as a witness however this Commissioner didn’t give two squats on whether or not the officer truly remember what happened.
So here my objection for foundation for the officers in our reading was correct and timely, the officer alone cannot testify as to the accuracy of the radar rating however the judge overruled anyways. In order to properly admit the radar reading the certificate should have been admitted beforehand. This is not an incredibly huge issue as all cross-examine him about this more in detail after he stops testifying.
Now one particular thing to note here that I can adjust my next trial if I ever have, is how I worded my hearsay objection. When I was addicted to hearsay I was objecting on the grounds of the officer was testifying to the existence of a writing that was not in court to be cross-examined. However, to my surprise the Commissioner stores these records on file and asked if I like to see the documents. This was a little bit shocked however I can understand why they keep it on file for ease of access for situations like this.
No one super important thing to note about the calibration is at per the vehicle code Calibration Record must be certified by independence facility. These facilities are normally private entities owned by someone who is not a public official or tied to the government. In that case in order for the record to be admitted and must be the exception of evidence code 1271 and one of the requirements of 1271 is to be accompanied with a valid affidavit signed by a public notary.
Here kind of threw me for a little bit i.e. should have been more on my toes on this one, but the Commissioner points to a certified stamp that is on the back of calibration record saying that it fulfills a requirement of 1270C Testimony from the costodian/affidavit. This couldn’t of been more wrong I believe the certification me fulfill requirements of 1531 however there is no sworn statements with this stamp by public notary which is in affidavit requirement. I could be wrong on this particular point so I don’t make this my primary argument for trial I then start moving towards attacking the survey.
At this point here the cat is out of the bag and then go back and forth the Commissioner about my logic in regards to the requirements of the survey and even provid case law referencing to case with the same exact circumstances. The judge doesn’t bother reading it declares a nonbinding shuffles it aside. At this particular point I knew I was getting it convicted and I was not a fair trial I would have to appeal the conviction. I think if the judge were to side with me on the law she would have quite an issue with everyone behind me who hear the arguments and then insist that their case would also need to be dismissed if the officer failed to bring the survey which I don’t believe very many of did.