6-yr old NY Speeding Ticket

I got a ticket in 2009 in a small town in NY on the Taconic. At the time, I mailed the ticket in and plead Not Guilty. I never heard from the local court until just today - 6 years later! 6 years!!! That seems grounds enough to dismiss the whole bother, but I will go to the pre-trial anyway (2 hour drive from here I think).

Anyone have any advice?

That doesn't seem like a very speedy trial.

*snort*

ffof said:
I got a ticket in 2009 in a small town in NY on the Taconic. At the time, I mailed the ticket in and plead Not Guilty. I never heard from the local court until just today - 6 years later! 6 years!!! That seems grounds enough to dismiss the whole bother, but I will go to the pre-trial anyway (2 hour drive from here I think).
Anyone have any advice?

Should you hire a lawyer? Is the town saying that you never responded to the ticket?

RobB said:
That doesn't seem like a very speedy trial.

No, it doesn't, and OP should ask for a dismissal on those grounds. I doubt you even need a lawyer. Just look around a bit for previous cases.

You may even be able to get it done over the phone. Probably not, but maybe

@tjohn They said "This court has received your not guilty plea on the charges listed above..." I'll go and try to talk my way out of the ticket/points, but it sure seems that having 6 years go by with nary a peep is some sort of statute of limitations thingie.

I was reading on line about how if you show up for this plea bargain session that you ask all sorts of questions that the officer (if he shows up!) won't have the answers to...like what year/model was the speed gun, had your police car recently been tested for proper MPH calibration, etc. Also, I can remember that on the ticket (whoch goodness knows I don't have a copy of anymore) it had a back and forth of our exchange. I guess I could ask him details about the day that he might not remember.

@Jackson yes, it does seem that 6 years is a basis for dismissal. Maybe I should call the court first before bothering to go all the way.

I am not a lawyer but if it were me,

I would begin by writing a request for "dismissal for lack of prosecution." I would include a reference to the 6th Amendment's requirement for a speedy trial and that the court's delay of six years is prejudiced against me because the officer has notes to rely on and I don't.

I would write these points and present them to the prosecutor and then to the court.

I doubt you will get much resistance to a request for dismissal but they will require your presence at the court.

I like that! thanks jerseryj.

Also, I was thinking I could/should call the court and ask that they send me a copy of the ticket. But if so, then I can't claim that "I don't have the same notes as the officer".

Question, my letter says that this is a pre-trial conference (for a chance to negotiate a plea bargain), not a trial. There's only a trial if no one can agree on the plea bargain. I just read on the interwebs that asking for a Dismissal for lack of prosecution should be done at a trial. Does this make sense?? I just know what I want as my preferred outcome... I would not want points, and I don't want to pay the huge fine ($250-300 range going 72 in a 55) but I would be willing to pay some court costs...like maybe $30.

ALso, if the officer doesn't come, do they re-schedule or is it my lucky day?

Were you going 72 in a 55?

If you did the crime, do the time. Go to the session. The prosecutor will likely offer you a plea deal for $175 or so, no points. Take it. Pay it. $30 is a pipe dream.

yes, they claim 72 in a 55.

pcg, youre right, i guess 30 is a pipe dream..Mostly having no points is the number 1 outcome.

Still, I can't come up with any reason it has taken them 6 years to contact me. 6 years!!!

(woops, dupe post)

ffof said:
I like that! thanks jerseryj.
Also, I was thinking I could/should call the court and ask that they send me a copy of the ticket. But if so, then I can't claim that "I don't have the same notes as the officer".

Ticket indicates most, but not all of what is in the officer's notes. Based on experience, the officer is allowed to refer to notes but not read them. You could object --- is the officer giving testimony or reading.

ffof said:
Question, my letter says that this is a pre-trial conference (for a chance to negotiate a plea bargain), not a trial. There's only a trial if no one can agree on the plea bargain. I just read on the interwebs that asking for a Dismissal for lack of prosecution should be done at a trial. Does this make sense?? I just know what I want as my preferred outcome... I would not want points, and I don't want to pay the huge fine ($250-300 range going 72 in a 55) but I would be willing to pay some court costs...like maybe $30.


ALso, if the officer doesn't come, do they re-schedule or is it my lucky day?

Based on such a letter as I referenced above, the prosecutor may ask you to stay and then go to the judge and offer to dismiss. If you get points, the maximum points applied to an out of state offense is two points. You may get a fine but not necessarily.

At this point in time, they may just be wanting to get it off their books as an open matter. They know the cop may not be able to obtain records for the stop and so may also agree to a dismissal.

oh, one more bit of info. About 2-3 months after I mailed in the ticket with the Not Guilty plea, I still hadn't heard from the town court about a court date, so I called them up to see if I had missed something in the mail, etc. The lady on the phone said she didn't see any record of this ticket.

It is curious and I wonder where my ticket/not guilty plea has been sitting all these years.

There are a thousand reasons the ticket could be lost for so long. That's not important. If you were not guilty, I think jerseyjack's advice is best. If you were guilty, pay the fine and be done. People try to get out of traffic tickets just because they don't want them, and to me, that's not a good reason. Yes, the system is messed up, but that's not a reason, either, if you were guilty.

A lawyer-friend of mine who fought a speeding ticket in court asked the judge if he could take a look at the paper that the testifying police officer was referring to. The officer immediately withdrew his statement, and the case was dismissed.

They will blame you, claiming you should have followed up, for the delay and therefore say its not a speedy trial violation.

They can claim you were responsible to keep notes until the case was resolved.

You'll want to take a look at Article 30 of New York's Criminal Procedure Law (speedy trial stuff); and (I think) Article 2 of its Vehicle and Traffic Law (regarding the applicability of the CPL to the jurisdiction in which you'll be appearing).
If you find what you need, write a letter to the Judge (make a phone call and get their name) moving for dismissal, and asking for a continuance pending the Court's ruling.
If you don't get a response, show up on the appointed date; and again seek dismissal, reminding the Court of your written motion of xx August 2015.
It's most likely too late to request a supporting deposition, but look it up. Probably in the CPL, but might be in the VTL.
If you speak to the Judge articulately and intelligently, don't get flustered if they have no idea of what you speak. Some local Judges have less of an understanding of the law, than you.
Address the Judge as Judge xxxxx or Your Honor; the Court officers and complainant by their appropriate titles - Trooper, Deputy, Officer.
Good luck - slow down - be well - and do good.
TomR
P.s., I love the Taconic Parkway.

jmitw said:
They will blame you, claiming you should have followed up, for the delay and therefore say its not a speedy trial violation.

I did follow up a couple months after sending the ticket in with Not Guilty plea since I hadn't gotten the summons to court at that time. The court secretary told me there was no record of that ticket. So I let it go.

Tom R, thanks, I'll look up all that stuff and see if I can make hay of it! Thanks!

Tom_Reingold said:
There are a thousand reasons the ticket could be lost for so long. That's not important. If you were not guilty, I think jerseyjack's advice is best. If you were guilty, pay the fine and be done. People try to get out of traffic tickets just because they don't want them, and to me, that's not a good reason. Yes, the system is messed up, but that's not a reason, either, if you were guilty.

I was worried about getting points and the officer told me to send in the ticket with Not Guilty. maybe I was going 72, maybe not. I was very unfamiliar with the road and the exit that I was looking for at the time. I remember a feeling of being hemmed in by another car and was worried I'd miss my exit. I guess all that doesn't matter. In the meantime, I plead Not Guilty, and thus, there's a pre-trial date....6 years later. I'm definitely looking into the speedy trial stuff. If it ends up I get the points and the fine, so be it. If not, I'm happier

How old of a guy was the cop? Maybe he retired.

It seems like he was probably in his 40s but I couldn't swear to it. 6 years is a long time and he's a state cop. Seems unlikely that he would be at the hearing.

ffof said:
...and he's a state cop. Seems unlikely that he would be at the hearing.

On Taconic, state troopers work out of local barracks, so very well could be local. His brother might be the local mayor.

IMO, sounds like town is turning over old mattress to find revenue, so don't assume you're unique. Local judge probably has heard lots of these old-ticket cases, and already is pre-disposed to hang you. My guess is prosecutor will offer you a no-points "deal" in exchange for settling, plus ridiculous court costs fee.

NJ has run a variation of this racket for years. Plea to lesser charge, avoid insurance surcharge, but pay crazy court/administrative fees that state and municipality pocket. Everyone goes home happy.

Sounds reasonable.

I'll report back after the hearing, for sure, but it's not til mid-October.

they will claim that is even more proof that you knew there was an issue and ignored and should have followed up again until it was resolved. Courts regularly blatantly violate the law unless you back them into the corner and they can't play the game any more. I once heard there are an estimated 20,000 innocent people in jail...and countless more convicted of lesser offenses...and often the court knows they are innocent..or had their rights seriously violated...and thinks its funny

ffof said:

jmitw said:
They will blame you, claiming you should have followed up, for the delay and therefore say its not a speedy trial violation.

I did follow up a couple months after sending the ticket in with Not Guilty plea since I hadn't gotten the summons to court at that time. The court secretary told me there was no record of that ticket. So I let it go.

I'm frightened, Auntie Em.

I would probably do a quick google search on the municipality where the ticket was issued. There were some problem courts up there and certain judges were removed due to misconduct. The local judges are elected and many are not lawyers and don't really understand the law and get into trouble.