Challenging a court's jurisdiction? (Lawyers??)

[SkyHog]

So - back in September, I was pulled over and issued a speeding citation. The police used an aircraft to relay speed information to a state trooper on the highway, who pulled me over a few minutes later.

The alleged infraction occurred within the town limits of Monument, CO, which is in El Paso County, but the traffic stop occurred outside of any city limits within Douglas County. Since it was a State Trooper, I don't doubt for a moment that the police officer has jurisdiction, but the case is scheduled in Douglas County.

Now, I'm not fishing for a "techincality" to get out of this - in fact, I just want to get discovery so I can prepare to defend myself. Unfortunately, Colorado has an interesting law that removes the requirement for discovery for traffic cases, but individual towns and cities often have different requirements.

That said - if the case was scheduled in Monument, the prosecution would be obligated to provide me discovery. Today, they are not.

Why do I need discovery? Because I was not speeding, at least, not as much as they claim I was "clocked" at. I was told I was caught doing 110 in a 75MPH zone, but as a "favor," the penalty would be reduced to 96 in a 75. I need to know how the speed was determined so that I can figure out where their error was. And I certainly can't do that mere minutes before talking to a judge.

So - two questions for y'all:

1. Does the jurisdiction apply to the location the offense is alleged to occur, or the location of the traffic stop?
2. How does one challenge a court's authority without just ****ing off the judge and essentially ruining any defense that exists?

 

[dell30rb]

get a lawyer

 

[JB1842]

Jurisdiction in this case sounds like it applies to the prosecuting agency, not location of the violation, at least that is how I am understanding this. You might not **** the judge off, ala Judge Judy, but be prepared if the judge feels the need to put you in your place. Will they hold it against you? Possibly. See if you can plea to a defective spedometer. Higher fine, but may not go towards your license and it won't affect your insurance rates.

 

[SkyHog]

Jurisdiction in this case sounds like it applies to the prosecuting agency, not location of the violation, at least that is how I am understanding this. You might not **** the judge off, ala Judge Judy, but be prepared if the judge feels the need to put you in your place. Will they hold it against you? Possibly. See if you can plea to a defective spedometer. Higher fine, but may not go towards your license and it won't affect your insurance rates.

I'd rather not plea bargain this one - I am 99% sure I was not speeding, and certainly not to the level they claim. I probably have a good case, provided I can see what evidence they're gonna try to use against me.

 

[SkyHog]

get a lawyer

I'm not going to get a lawyer for a speeding ticket, that's silly. This is a mere procedural question. I know how to file the motion, but I am looking for advice on whether I have the grounds to challenge the jurisdiction of the court based on the facts above, and also whether its just going to make the judge mad because its a silly distinction to him anyway.

If the state of Colorado hadn't removed the obligation to provide discovery this would be a much simpler thing anyway, as I don't really care where the case is tried if not for that small requirement.

 

[JB1842]

I'd rather not plea bargain this one - I am 99% sure I was not speeding, and certainly not to the level they claim. I probably have a good case, provided I can see what evidence they're gonna try to use against me.

About the best you can do is hope the trooper shows us to testify and you can question him and the evidence then, or hope he doesn't show up and ask for the ticket to be dismissed for lack of evidence.

 

[lowtimer]

About the best you can do is hope the trooper shows us to testify and you can question him and the evidence then, or hope he doesn't show up and ask for the ticket to be dismissed for lack of evidence.

Will the person observing/timing the vehicle from the aircraft also be required to show up for this?

 

[JB1842]

Will the person observing/timing the vehicle from the aircraft also be required to show up for this?

I don't know. Might be the technicality OP is looking for.

 

[EdFred]

Will your car actually go 110? A lot of cars are chip limited. My truck cuts out at 95ish.

Nick, you race cars. Didn't you do some work and put a speed limiter on your car that would make it impossible to go 110?

 

[Lindberg]

If you were here, I'd send you to a guy who would handle this for $75. There must be lawyers in Colorado who handle traffic tickets. Find a good one. He probably won't fight the way you're contemplating, but he'll know how to get you the best deal.

If you decide to fight aggressively on your own, consider what your time is worth, and what you'll do if you lose.

Do you have the right to request a jury.

 

[SkyHog]

Will the person observing/timing the vehicle from the aircraft also be required to show up for this?

Yes..

 

[SkyHog]

If you were here, I'd send you to a guy who would handle this for $75. There must be lawyers in Colorado who handle traffic tickets. Find a good one. He probably won't fight the way you're contemplating, but he'll know how to get you the best deal.

From what I've seen, those guys usually go for a crazy plea bargain that eliminates points but costs a lot of money.

If you decide to fight aggressively on your own, consider what your time is worth, and what you'll do if you lose.

My time is very valuable, but so is my driving record. If I lose, I'll owe a few more bucks in court costs.

Do you have the right to request a jury.

Not in Colorado, unfortunately.

 

[SkyHog]

Will your car actually go 110? A lot of cars are chip limited. My truck cuts out at 95ish.

Nick, you race cars. Didn't you do some work and put a speed limiter on your car that would make it impossible to go 110?

No such chip, as far as I know, but I've never gone 110, so I can't say for sure. I certainly wasn't going 110 the day of the citation.

 

[SkyHog]

No answer to the big question yet - which jurisdiction applies - the location of the offense, or the location of the citation?

 

[EdFred]

No such chip, as far as I know, but I've never gone 110, so I can't say for sure. I certainly wasn't going 110 the day of the citation.

I'd ask for video evidence of you doing 110. When I got my ticket where I was supposedly speeding, it was easy to tell from the video I was not.

And I would say it's where the violation occurred.

Ohio doesn't ticket me for speeding in Michigan.

 

[SkyHog]

I'd ask for video evidence of you doing 110. When I got my ticket where I was supposedly speeding, it was easy to tell from the video I was not.

And I would say it's where the violation occurred.

Ohio doesn't ticket me for speeding in Michigan.

That would be considered "discovery evidence," which I am not entitled to within Douglas County, but am entitled to in the Town of Monument and El Paso County.

 

[SkyHog]

Here's the relevant laws regarding discovery:

Rule 8. Discovery.

(a) Discovery shall not be available prior to final hearing.

(b)

At the time of final hearing, the defendant is entitled to inspect all documents prepared by the officer which the officer intends to use in the presentation of evidence.


http://web.lexisnexis.com/research/...B-zSkAW&_md5=d897e7947a2b04d0ba4fa172d069e042

And if it is withing city limits:

(a)

By Defendant. Upon the motion of a defendant or upon the court's own motion at any time after the filing of the complaint or summons and complaint the court may order the prosecution to permit the defendant to inspect and copy or photograph any books, papers, documents, photographs, or tangible objects that are within the prosecution's possession and control, upon a showing that the items sought may be material to the preparation of the defense and that the request is reasonable. The order shall specify the time, place, and manner of making the inspection and of taking the copies or photographs and may prescribe such terms and conditions as are just.

(b)

Witness's Statements. At any time after the filing of the complaint or summons and complaint, upon the request of a defendant or upon the order of court, the prosecution shall disclose to the defendant the names and addresses of persons whom the prosecution intends to call as witnesses at the hearing or trial, together with any witness statements.

(c)

Irrelevant Matters. If the prosecution claims that any material or statement ordered to be produced under this rule contains matter which does not relate to the subject matter of the witness's testimony, the court shall order it to deliver the statement for the court's inspection in chambers. Upon such delivery the court shall excise the portions of the statement which do not relate to the subject matter of the witness's testimony, then the court shall direct delivery of the statement to the defendant.

(d)

Statement Defined. The term "statement" as used in sections (b) and (c) of this Rule in relation to any witness who may be called by the prosecution means:

(1)

A written statement made by such witness and signed or otherwise adopted or approved by the witness;

(2)

A mechanical, electrical, or other recording, or a transcription thereof, which is a recital of an oral statement made by such witness; or

(3)

Stenographic or written statements or notes which are in substance recitals of an oral statement made by such witness and which were reduced to writing contemporaneously with the making of such oral statement.

(e)

Additional Rules. Municipal courts may make such additional rules for discretionary or mandatory discovery by the defense or by the prosecution as are consistent with these rules and with any applicable law.


http://web.lexisnexis.com/research/...k-zSkAl&_md5=367a44cd99cfa4d27d29e60cd00dfee1

 

[SkyHog]

Ohio doesn't ticket me for speeding in Michigan.

That happens to be my thought too - if I murder someone in Alaska, and am arrested for it in California, I'm pretty sure I'd face trial in Alaska.

 

[JB1842]

No answer to the big question yet - which jurisdiction applies - the location of the offense, or the location of the citation?

Doesn't matter as long as the trooper has the authority to write the ticket. It's like commiting bank robbery in a city, but you pick up a federal charge for the robbery. The rules for the city jurisdiction don't apply, you follow the fed rules. I'm going to assume that applies when dealing with state troopers. They have jurisdiction state wide, so it won't matter what county the violation or citation take place. Jurisdiction doesn't just follow borders.

 

[EdFred]

Nick,

(b)At the time of final hearing, the defendant is entitled to inspect all documents prepared by the officer which the officer intends to use in the presentation of evidence.

Take your time with that if that's the case. Inspect them....thoroughly.

 

[Matthew]

A cop buddy of mine works in a college town. I asked him once about jurisdiction of campus cops/city cops. His answer was interesting, "We try to stay out of each others' parts of town. Technically the University (a state university) is part of the city, so we have jurisdiction on campus. But the campus cops are commissioned by the State so they actually have jurisdiction throughout the state."

That doesn't help you, but it does show how complicated it can get. Maybe a court clerk has something on file for your case that can explain it?

 

[SkyHog]

Doesn't matter as long as the trooper has the authority to write the ticket. It's like commiting bank robbery in a city, but you pick up a federal charge for the robbery. The rules for the city jurisdiction don't apply, you follow the fed rules. I'm going to assume that applies when dealing with state troopers. They have jurisdiction state wide, so it won't matter what county the violation or citation take place. Jurisdiction doesn't just follow borders.

That's the thing - I'm not challenging the officer's jurisdiction. Clearly, she had the authority to write the ticket. The question is whether the Douglas County courthouse has the authority and jurisdiction to try me for a crime that allegedly occurred in a neighboring county.

Also - I'm not looking for a technicality to get off - I am looking for a method of preparing a valid defense against a crime that I didn't commit. I can't adequately do that in the few minutes I'd be allowed to review discovery ahead of time.

Edit: To be clear - I'd be just as happy with a change of venue to a town with discovery rights as I would with an outright dismissal.

And your scenario of city vs federal doesn't apply apples to apples, as the city is within the feds jurisdiction, but the town of Monument is not within the neighboring county's jurisdiction (it is under El Paso County's jurisdiction, but not Douglas County)

 

[AdamZ]

...
So - two questions for y'all:

1. Does the jurisdiction apply to the location the offense is alleged to occur, or the location of the traffic stop?
2. How does one challenge a court's authority without just ****ing off the judge and essentially ruining any defense that exists?

* Nick I'm speaking in generalities as I'm not licensed in CO so don't take this as advice because its not intended to be legal advice.

1) Generally Jurisdiction and venue rest where the alleged crime occurred. That said in some cases here in PA you can prosecute cases in another county, if there is some minimal contact ie One drug deal out of 50. You really need to know CO's laws regarding jurisdiction. You should be able to find it in the state statues.

2) That's a tougher question to answer. If it were me. I'd say trooper at what mile marker or point did you start to clock me and at what point did you stop. ( They Probably used a system like vascar where you hit the stop watch when car passes point "A" and stop it when it passes point "B") if you can show that was in another jurisdiction then I'd move to dismiss based on lack of jurisdiction if that is in accordance with CO law.

On another note many states have rules where the police need to present evidence of calibration and training of the device used and the officer using the device. In PA they must provide copies of the calibration. If the calibration is older that a certain time period the evidence can be suppressed.

I'd ask for video evidence of you doing 110. When I got my ticket where I was supposedly speeding, it was easy to tell from the video I was not.

And I would say it's where the violation occurred.

Ohio doesn't ticket me for speeding in Michigan.

That happens to be my thought too - if I murder someone in Alaska, and am arrested for it in California, I'm pretty sure I'd face trial in Alaska.

Two very different situations from what Nick is describing. One involves the laws of differing states one involves the laws of the same state.

 

[JB1842]

That's the thing - I'm not challenging the officer's jurisdiction. Clearly, she had the authority to write the ticket. The question is whether the Douglas County courthouse has the authority and jurisdiction to try me for a crime that allegedly occurred in a neighboring county.

Also - I'm not looking for a technicality to get off - I am looking for a method of preparing a valid defense against a crime that I didn't commit. I can't adequately do that in the few minutes I'd be allowed to review discovery ahead of time.

Edit: To be clear - I'd be just as happy with a change of venue to a town with discovery rights as I would with an outright dismissal.

And your scenario of city vs federal doesn't apply apples to apples, as the city is within the feds jurisdiction, but the town of Monument is not within the neighboring county's jurisdiction (it is under El Paso County's jurisdiction, but not Douglas County)

What I meant with my fed v. city was to compare the troopers jurisdiction applying to multiple counties in the your situation are in. From a quick look on the internet it looks like the county courts, not the municipal courts, oversee state trooper tickets in Colorado, and the municipal rules you cited earlier don't apply. Looks like you aren't going to get to look at anything until your court date.

 

[SkyHog]

What I meant with my fed v. city was to compare the troopers jurisdiction applying to multiple counties in the your situation are in. From a quick look on the internet it looks like the county courts, not the municipal courts, oversee state trooper tickets in Colorado, and the municipal rules you cited earlier don't apply. Looks like you aren't going to get to look at anything until your court date.

That's a good point, unfortunately.

Well, I guess I'll go ahead and file my motion for discovery anyway on the off chance that they provide it.

 

[EdFred]

How can you not have the chance to appropriately defend yourself?

That seems like a violation of due process.

 

[JB1842]

That's a good point, unfortunately.

Well, I guess I'll go ahead and file my motion for discovery anyway on the off chance that they provide it.

Check the local rules for filing. Sometimes they have to be filed within so many days before the court date or they get thrown out.

 

[JB1842]

How can you not have the chance to appropriately defend yourself?

That seems like a violation of due process.

From what I'm reading, traffic violations (such as the OP's) are considered civil offenses, so due process as one would think relating to a criminal charge may not apply. A traffic offense in CO is a criminal offense, and then I would for sure recommend raising hell about due process.

 

[Gerhardt]

Clearly, SHE had the authority to write the ticket.

You made a pass at her, didn't you?

 

[EdFred]

From what I'm reading, traffic violations (such as the OP's) are considered civil offenses, so due process as one would think relating to a criminal charge may not apply. A traffic offense in CO is a criminal offense, and then I would for sure recommend raising hell about due process.

Even so, seems like a racket. Luckily I was able to get video of me not speeding even though the office claimed I was doing 18 over. With no discovery what's to prevent them from saying anything they wanted in court - whether accurate or not. You know as well as I do judges always side with the officers on a he said/he said case, even though court have granted officers the right to lie outside the court room.

"You wrote him a ticket for 96 in a 75?"
"Yes, your honor."
"Was he going 96?"
"That's what the ticket says."

No perjury involved, but it doesn't mean the 96 was true. At least with discovery you have a chance. But tickets aren't about keeping people driving safe, it's just a revenue stream.

 

[Clark1961]

Colorado has some odd quirks. For instance if the ticket is for more than 15 mph over the posted limit, the state trooper can check a box indicating that it is felony speeding. At that point the court either proceeds with a jury trial or dismisses the ticket. The court/DA cannot administratively reduce the charge.

of course I am not a lawyer, I did not stay at a Holiday Inn last night, and the law may have been changed since my friend learned the gritty details related above

 

[Lindberg]

Also - I'm not looking for a technicality to get off - I am looking for a method of preparing a valid defense against a crime that I didn't commit.

"Innocent" people lose often. Especially in traffic court. You'd likely be better off looking for a technicality. Don't count on winning just because you are right.

 

[Henning]

So - back in September, I was pulled over and issued a speeding citation. The police used an aircraft to relay speed information to a state trooper on the highway, who pulled me over a few minutes later.

The alleged infraction occurred within the town limits of Monument, CO, which is in El Paso County, but the traffic stop occurred outside of any city limits within Douglas County. Since it was a State Trooper, I don't doubt for a moment that the police officer has jurisdiction, but the case is scheduled in Douglas County.

Now, I'm not fishing for a "techincality" to get out of this - in fact, I just want to get discovery so I can prepare to defend myself. Unfortunately, Colorado has an interesting law that removes the requirement for discovery for traffic cases, but individual towns and cities often have different requirements.

That said - if the case was scheduled in Monument, the prosecution would be obligated to provide me discovery. Today, they are not.

Why do I need discovery? Because I was not speeding, at least, not as much as they claim I was "clocked" at. I was told I was caught doing 110 in a 75MPH zone, but as a "favor," the penalty would be reduced to 96 in a 75. I need to know how the speed was determined so that I can figure out where their error was. And I certainly can't do that mere minutes before talking to a judge.

So - two questions for y'all:

1. Does the jurisdiction apply to the location the offense is alleged to occur, or the location of the traffic stop?
2. How does one challenge a court's authority without just ****ing off the judge and essentially ruining any defense that exists?

Typically there are marks painted on the highway and the aircraft times you between the marks and it's a simple D/T=S equation.

Question, were you doing 110? Doesn't really matter, either get a lawyer if you want to fight it, without one you stand no chance because the system is designed and staffed to need lawyers to navigate since it's built and run by lawyers and they need to make money. Depending on the cost of the ticket, that may or may not be worthwhile.

The other options are to just pay the ticket, or, this requires more than one day in court, you show up and plea not guilty and get a court date. Show up to that court date and hope the cops don't show up and the ticket gets dismissed due to lack of prosecution. If they do show up and you are found guilty, it still ends up being cheaper than an expensive ticket.

 

[Henning]

From what I'm reading, traffic violations (such as the OP's) are considered civil offenses, so due process as one would think relating to a criminal charge may not apply. A traffic offense in CO is a criminal offense, and then I would for sure recommend raising hell about due process.

If you can end up in jail over it, how can it be a 'civil offense'?

 

[SkyHog]

Question, were you doing 110?

No. In fact, its not really possible to have hit 110 in the area I was measured, as it was less than a mile from the point where I joined the interstate, and it was during heavy rush hour traffic.

 

[Henning]

No. In fact, its not really possible to have hit 110 in the area I was measured, as it was less than a mile from the point where I joined the interstate, and it was during heavy rush hour traffic.

Lol, not saying that's not true, but it's not a compelling incontrovertible argument, I have hit 110 in less than a mile many times, and it doesn't take a whole lot of room in traffic to do it.

 

[kevin7500]

I know that this is going to sound stupid, but find someone with an advanced degree in physics or math if you really want to win. Collect all of the relevant data that is used to calculate your speed, height of observation, angles involved, speed of the aircraft, etc. A good math or physics guy will be able to calculate your actual speed and include significant figures which will show that you may have been traveling between something like 60 & 110. The cops always use the highest number in the significant figures calculation (according to a physics prof who did accident investigations). In other words, a good physics guy will prove that the calculations involved are worthless.

 

[TEFLONSEAN]

No. In fact, its not really possible to have hit 110 in the area I was measured, as it was less than a mile from the point where I joined the interstate, and it was during heavy rush hour traffic.

Was heavy traffic marked on the ticket?

Let me give you an example of a ticket i fought and won when I was 17....

I live in California....

(California has a "Basic Speed Law." This law means that you may never drive faster than is safe for current conditions. For example, if you are driving 45 mph in a 55 mph speed zone during a dense fog, you could be cited for driving "too fast for conditions."

Regardless of the posted speed limit, your speed should depend on:

The number and speed of other vehicles on the road.
Whether the road surface is smooth, rough, graveled, wet, dry, wide, or narrow.
Bicyclists or pedestrians walking on the road’s edge or crossing the street.
Whether it is raining, foggy, snowing, windy, or dusty.)

Highway Patrol cited me for 80mph on freeway and marked "heavy traffic" on the ticket.

Court day....officer shows up....crap!!! Ok I got this....I had the right to question the officer.

Me: Officer how did you come to the conclusion I was driving at 80mph.

Officer: I paced your vehicle for 2 miles and determined your speed.

Me: While pacing my vehicle did you observe me weaving in and out of traffic?

Officer: No your vehicle was in the #1 lane and I was pacing you in the #2 lane.

Me: Based on the Basic Speed Law in California....the fact that I was in "Heavy Traffic" as marked on the ticket and not weaving in and out of traffic would you agree that I was moving with the flow of traffic?

Officer: I paced you at 80mph.

Me: According to the Basic Speed Law I was not in violation given the facts that I was moving with the flow of traffic.

Judge: Case dismissed....(and had some very nice words to say to me as a kid afterwards...I was sweating bullets)

 

[skidoo]

Here is one thing that bugs me about speed limits and such speedometers.

Me: Officer, did you make your measurement for an hour?

Officer: No, I measured you for 1 minute.

Me: Officer, did you measure my distance traveled for the 110 miles?

Officer, No, I only measured you for less than a mile.

Me: Then, how can you say that I traveled at a speed of 110 miles in an hour if you neither measured the 110 miles, nor measured for the hour?

Officer: Well, it is converted to what you would have done if you kept the same rate of speed.

Me: So, what you are saying is that you are charging a crime for something I would have done rather than what actually was done. Judge, I move to dismiss this charge based on the fact that I actually did not do what was charged.


I don't know how it would go. But, I know the terms and measurements used do not match up with proper measurement techniques. If the law wanted to limit the short term speed, such as in a period of a second or a minute, then the speed limits should be defined in those terms, such as feet per second. Then, one can legitimately measure ones speed in the actual terms used. 110 fps sustained for an hour would travel 75 miles. So, if the speed law was specified as limited to 110 fps, then an officer could measure the distance traveled in one second and compare the actual measurement to the law rather than a calculated value.

 

[Henning]

Here is one thing that bugs me about speed limits and such speedometers.

Me: Officer, did you make your measurement for an hour?

Officer: No, I measured you for 1 minute.

Me: Officer, did you measure my distance traveled for the 110 miles?

Officer, No, I only measured you for less than a mile.

Me: Then, how can you say that I traveled at a speed of 110 miles in an hour if you neither measured the 110 miles, nor measured for the hour?

Officer: Well, it is converted to what you would have done if you kept the same rate of speed.

Me: So, what you are saying is that you are charging a crime for something I would have done rather than what actually was done. Judge, I move to dismiss this charge based on the fact that I actually did not do what was charged.


I don't know how it would go. But, I know the terms and measurements used do not match up with proper measurement techniques. If the law wanted to limit the short term speed, such as in a period of a second or a minute, then the speed limits should be defined in those terms, such as feet per second. Then, one can legitimately measure ones speed in the actual terms used. 110 fps sustained for an hour would travel 75 miles. So, if the speed law was specified as limited to 110 fps, then an officer could measure the distance traveled in one second and compare the actual measurement to the law rather than a calculated value.

I know how it would go, the judge would do a face palm and say "$150+ court costs, next..."