PLEASE READ! First ticket

[Vinny14369]

OK, so apparently the fact that I am an attorney does not qualify me to provide the general advice that one should not go into court without an attorney. Strange reasoning, indeed. How is my advice any different that someone suggesting the use of synthetic oil instead conventional oil?

Apparently, in this highly regulated and peer-reviewed forum, I cannot simply mention that I am an attorney and, as such, suggest that one should not go to court without representation. I'll be sure to post my resume ahead of time so viewers can then determine whether my highly technical advice is trustworthy...lol

For whatever its worth, I'll elaborate.

It does not matter what his traffic infraction was. That has absolutely no bearing on my advice. I am aware that laws vary from state to state, including laws regarding criminal and non-criminal traffic infractions. However, judges have discretion in any courtroom. They have the power to not only issue hefty fines, points against your DL, community service and DL suspension. In addition, judges can depart from the law and sentence an alleged wrongdoer with penalties that exceed the statutory maximum. Why? because they can do anything they want. If you didn't go to court with a lawyer to begin with, then the judge does not have to restrain himself if you piss him off because he knows the odds of you retaining an attorney to appeal his decision is slim.

For whatever it's worth, I am a criminal defense attorney in 2 states. Yes, that does NOT include KY. I have been to court on countless occassions where a driver did not want to me pay my fee to go to court on his/her behalf to contest their ticket. I have seen, more than I care to remember, several judges suspend that same driver's DL's for nothing more than a driver going 30 mph. In addition, the fines ranged several hundred dollars. Again, this can happen in any courtroom accross the country!

But hey, what do I know...save yourself a few hundred dollars and roll the dice by going to court by yourself. The outcome may be fine. You could walk out of their with no fine or points on your DL. Or, you could get nailed for the reasons set forth above.

C-Kwik indicated that "I'm just not one to allow someone to arbitrarily decide on getting an attorney without good reason." Notwithstanding the fact that you may not be attorney yourself, I assume your advice to this person who got the ticket would be to possibly consider going to court w/o an attorney. My advice was simply very general. The original poster should retain an attorney. This way, he is maximizing his chances of obtaining best outcome in his situtation. But hey, do whatever you want. It's not my DL.

[pfarmer]

so here it is...if your in cali..then i might be able to help you...but it only works 7/10 times..so lets pray...this is what you do...

if your in california...you fight your ticket...they're gonna set you a trial date...10 businesse day before that trial date...you reschdule your date tell them your leaving outta town or what not...and then you go in..and plead not guilty..this is your only way of getting out of it...(either way your effed)..so plead not guilty..so the judge is gonna set you another trial date..to come in and fight it with the cop...but before that happens...rescudle it again..try to do it as many time as possible...your main goal is to push it back as looong as you can..cause after an amount of time the cop just throw away the paper work..and so when you actually do show up for the court..and the cop dont show up..you automatically win your trial...so lets pray that it works for you..ive down this a few times..and it has work most of the time..good luck bro..

While I do believe in getting a lawyer for this large of an infraction, my success has been alone the lines above. I don't recommend however doing the same thing over and over again. Instead and this works best if your case comes up first is to ask for a continuence and listen carefully to the rest of the cases for what gets drivers off and what nails them. In my cases I found that many judges are very concerned about accuracy on the ticket. For example with the my last one, I didn't argue the point to death about the fact that I was going the mentioned speed but not where the cop stated I was (he followed me for a couple of miles out of town into the county). Instead I present the fact that the cop had the color of my car wrong, the model (hatch back versus coupe) and I asked the cop to state what my car, model, and color was to the judge. Simple it was on the ticket which is what the guy was reading from. The judge stated that I admitted to the speed, but only in areas where it was legal, and he could not trust the statement when the cop had so many things wrong.

That is purely an example of what this particular judge was interested in. Others have their own little quirks, which is what you are after in the continuence, figuring what those quirks are.

Perry

[awdjdmtalon]

Vinny, don't feel bad, I am an ASE Certified Master Tech, and a VW Master Tech. And some of the people that question you as a lawyer, question my advice as a Master Techncian.

So continue to give advice, and let the doubters coments roll off your back. Thats what I do.

[Vinny14369]

AWD, thanks for the reply. I'm glad someone else sees my point!

[G_whizz]

So continue to give advice, and let the doubters coments roll off your back. Thats what I do.

This is teh internetz... gotta have thick skin sometimes fellas.

[Vinny14369]

I completely agree. This is a forum and should entertain ALL ideas and suggestions from ALL members ...

[tollboothwilley]

I don't think C-Kwik was insinuating that he shouldn't get a lawyer. I think he just wanted you to validate your reasoning a little bit. It makes more sense as you do so. He is the kind of person who really like to have evidence to back up what he says. Half of the posts that he makes are novels because of this very reason.

All in all, with an infraction as the OP has, I don't think anyone would disagree that a lawyer COULD be very beneficial in the outcome.

[Vinny14369]

I agree with you. I wasn't trying to be disrespectful to C-W, but I was just surprised that he called into question what was very general advice. Nevertheless, to each their own. I have read his posts in the past and have found them to be informative, as I am not very knowledgeable when it comes to vehicles.

Cheers!

[rpm240sx]

Yeah, I got a ticket in the middle of nowhere in west Texas once going 107 in a 70 Almost avoided it but got caught behind 2 18 wheeler's while trying to get off the hwy. That and you would be surprised just how fast a Camaro State Trooper can catch up to you haha Goes to show how long ago this was Anyway, I got really lucky and he didn't take me to jail. He saw my college parking sticker which caused some small talk and he saw that I was a nervous wreck and just gave me the ticket and sent me on my way. Long story short I paid a few hundred to a lawyer and he took care of it. I didn't even have to show up for court. Not sure how the lawyer pulled that one but if I were you I would take my chances with finding a lawyer that will work with you. Good luck...

[infg35coupe]

i bet a escort 9500ix radar detector would of prevented that....lol

ok i hope somebody here can help me out. tonight i got my first speeding ticket in my 1 week 2 day old G35. i was going 82 in a 35 its a long story but someone was riding my a** and i stepped on it. i didnt get arrested but i have to go to court its mandatory. has anyone had a speeding ticket this many MPH over the limit and what happend and how much did u have to pay? And about insurance some people told me since its my first ticket ever it might not go up im not sure how this works but im 21 years old and dont wanna pay a outragious insurance bill.

any help would be greatly appreciated

[YuNg1's_240sx]

my frined who is 16, got a ticket doin 92in 45, and got 0 points and only court fees. i knoHe said he aware of his guilt and he has been drving very aware now. he said he was sorry that he went so fast and that he put people in danger and that he would not do it again. This is his first ticket and he drives an red Si.

[LuckyLuke]

I got caught drag racing before. I was doing close to 90 on a 35 mph street. Lucky, the guy pulled me over knew me. He gave me a ticket instead impounding my car. My ticket was $285, and I just took one of those safety driving class online.

I still kept the ticket to remind me not do it again.

[xjaywalker]

Hummm! Just got my G 2 weeks ago and I got a speeding ticket as well. 90 in a 65. This was the first car I have ever owned that had over 200 hp. (That is NOT an excuse, just a fact).

Escort 9500ix or 9500ci (both rader and laser). This maybe a great discussion for a new thread.

[C-Kwik]

OK, so apparently the fact that I am an attorney does not qualify me to provide the general advice that one should not go into court without an attorney. Strange reasoning, indeed. How is my advice any different that someone suggesting the use of synthetic oil instead conventional oil?

I didn't say they shouldn't hire an attorney. The decision to hire an attorney should be case by case. Could depend on the infraction, the state, or maybe even the court.

As for the oil analogy, bear in mind that I wouldn't simply take anyone's advice about which oil to use without some empirical data to support it either. And its unlikely you'll find any recommendations from me about any product without empirical explanations about why a person should use it. Generally, I simply explain it and let others decide for themselves.

Apparently, in this highly regulated and peer-reviewed forum, I cannot simply mention that I am an attorney and, as such, suggest that one should not go to court without representation. I'll be sure to post my resume ahead of time so viewers can then determine whether my highly technical advice is trustworthy...lol

Saying you are an attorney doesn't necessarily mean you know what you are talking about (not saying you don't). I've dealt with enough attorneys to know they are not experts in all law, but typically the type of law they specialize in and perhaps even in the state they work in. While many legal theories do indeed apply broadly you styated quite specifically that he could lose his license. It may be possible, but before I would hire an attorney based on the possibility of losing my license, I'd check the law itself to see if a possible punishment is to lose your license for that infraction.

For whatever its worth, I'll elaborate.

It does not matter what his traffic infraction was. That has absolutely no bearing on my advice. I am aware that laws vary from state to state, including laws regarding criminal and non-criminal traffic infractions. However, judges have discretion in any courtroom. They have the power to not only issue hefty fines, points against your DL, community service and DL suspension. In addition, judges can depart from the law and sentence an alleged wrongdoer with penalties that exceed the statutory maximum. Why? because they can do anything they want. If you didn't go to court with a lawyer to begin with, then the judge does not have to restrain himself if you piss him off because he knows the odds of you retaining an attorney to appeal his decision is slim.

Sure, that's a possibility. Then again, many judges in CA lower the fine for just about everyone who shows up to court to the minimum. Some courts here won't allow you to take traffic school either if you plead not guilty (even if you are otherwise eligible). As for points, point systems vary from state to state. A judge here in CA doesn't issue points. Its based entirely off the type of infraction involved. (My understanding is that the DMV actually decides what points are assigned). Basically, most infractions here are 1 point but major offenses (DWI, driving with suspended license, etc.) are 2 points. The fines and punishments for infractions here are outlined within the vehicle code as well. I'd imagine this is the case in most states, but I don't claim to know what the laws are in other states. The point there was that laws and punishments for breaking the law vary from state to state, perhaps even from court to court and even from judge to judge.

For whatever it's worth, I am a criminal defense attorney in 2 states. Yes, that does NOT include KY. I have been to court on countless occassions where a driver did not want to me pay my fee to go to court on his/her behalf to contest their ticket. I have seen, more than I care to remember, several judges suspend that same driver's DL's for nothing more than a driver going 30 mph. In addition, the fines ranged several hundred dollars. Again, this can happen in any courtroom accross the country!

On the other hand, I pled not guilty for driving with a suspended license when I was younger. I didn't care to, but the officer threw on a particular infraction that I defintely didn't do. The arraignment judge gave me a hard time about it but I ended up pleading not guilty and was scheduled for a pretrial. Went to my pretrial and spoke to the DA. He basically took off all the charges except for driving with a suspended license. But dropped that from a misdemeanor to an infraction which lowered the fine to about $270 from nearly $1000. We had it okayed by the judge and I was off. Of course this was my experience which occurred in front of a particular judge, in a particular court, in a particular state. As a result, I would not rely on this as a point to make a case for not getting an attorney as someone els's outcome may be vastly different. My criticism was simply that there was a lack of any information that would allow a person to make an educated decision.

Now surely, poor outcomes can occur and my experience can be an exception, but I oppose statements by attorneys that tend to scare people into retaining them. The Larry H. Parker's of the lawyer world pretty much make a living based on this aspect alone.

But hey, what do I know...save yourself a few hundred dollars and roll the dice by going to court by yourself. The outcome may be fine. You could walk out of their with no fine or points on your DL. Or, you could get nailed for the reasons set forth above.

All I asked you to do was qualify your statement. While I wouldn't ask you to provide free legal advice, it would be helpful to understand what it is the law allows in that specific state before the risk of losing a license becomes apparent.

C-Kwik indicated that "I'm just not one to allow someone to arbitrarily decide on getting an attorney without good reason." Notwithstanding the fact that you may not be attorney yourself, I assume your advice to this person who got the ticket would be to possibly consider going to court w/o an attorney. My advice was simply very general. The original poster should retain an attorney. This way, he is maximizing his chances of obtaining best outcome in his situtation. But hey, do whatever you want. It's not my DL.

I provided no indication that I think he should have gone to court without an attorney. Each person's level of risk is their own. While you feel you may be doing the person good with such advice, you must consider there is still a fee for retaining an attorney. Any person should weigh the severity of the potential outcomes, the chances of each potential outcome against the cost of the fees. I'm sure you as an attorney do this and explain these aspects to your clients continually as you proceed through a case.

I agree with you. I wasn't trying to be disrespectful to C-W, but I was just surprised that he called into question what was very general advice. Nevertheless, to each their own. I have read his posts in the past and have found them to be informative, as I am not very knowledgeable when it comes to vehicles.

Cheers!

Nor am I. I realize the question tends to put you on the defensive (which is why I tried to be clear that I'm not attacking you) but its a hard question to pose without doing so. But my intent was simply to help the OP to be able to make a more infomred decision.

And as I always maintain, anyone is welcome to question anything I say. So I felt no disrespect through your response. Having worked in auto insurance claims for nearly 10 years, you're certainly not the first attorney I've debated with.