RED LIGHT CAMERAS
|
www.highwayrobbery.net
|
If you haven't already done so, please read the Home page
If you want to get a different judge,
there are three ways to do it. Note: When you have
successfully gotten rid of a judge, you don't get to
choose who - or where - the new judge will be. (1)
If It's a Pro Tem... The courtroom staff may announce that there is a "temporary judge." A temporary judge could be a retired judge doing some part time work, or it could be a Pro Tem - a lawyer filling-in for the day. If it is the latter, they will ask you to sign a waiver (they might pass it around the courtroom, on a clipboard, for everyone to sign), and you can get rid of that Pro Tem by simply refusing to sign the waiver. Or, if you have already signed it, you can withdraw your waiver. You don't need to use up your one Peremptory Challenge (described below - see the big heading) on him. But it can be tricky. Here is one defendant's story about dealing with a Pro Tem judge at arraignment:
The story above
demonstrates the complexity of traffic court:
Refusing to sign the waiver can result in a good
outcome, but that same outcome could be available from
the Pro Tem - if it's a good Pro Tem. (2) Peremptory
Challenge ("PC") (pronounced pur-emptory, not
pre-emptory) Fight
Your
Ticket, says: "You
don't
have
to prove that the judge is unfair or
biased, you just have to believe
it. You may have heard that a
particular judge is unfair or rude,
sides with police officers over
defendants, metes out heavy fines, or
worse." In other words, it doesn't matter what your reason is; with a Peremptory Challenge the only thing that matters is that you did it on time. In
some circumstances (explained below) you
can do a Peremptory Challenge at the very
last minute (even verbally), just before
your trial begins. But
do not file a PC before you've
been given a court date (for an
arraignment or a trial or a Trial by
Declaration). (If you are not 100%
sure as to what is happening or what you
are supposed to do on the date you have
upcoming -- is it for an arraignment,
a trial, or something else? -- read
the big green Terminology
Box near the top of the Handling
Your Ticket section on the Your Ticket
page.)
To
get rid of a Pro Tem (a lawyer acting as a
temporary judge), you do not need to use
up your one PC. You can simply
refuse to sign the waiver form they pass
around the courtroom when there's a Pro
Tem on the bench, and they will move your
case to a commissioner or a judge.
See the big heading, "If It's a Pro Tem,"
above. A Peremptory Challenge form is available, way below, in the wallpaper area.
If
you're doing it on the court date... If you are making your challenge on the day of your court appearance, hand it to the bailiff when your case is called. Or you can do it verbally - tell the judge that you move to disqualify him under 170.6. But I have encountered a judge who says PC's can't be done verbally, so you may need to quote 170.6(a)(2), which says, "(2) Any party... may establish this prejudice by an oral or written motion..." Be
sure to do it right after your case is
called, before any testimony is taken,
because 170.6(a)(2) also says, "In
no event shall any Judge... entertain
the motion if it be made... after
swearing in the first witness or the
giving of any evidence or after trial of
the cause has otherwise commenced.
In the case of trials or hearings not
herein specifically provided for, the
procedure herein specified shall be
followed as nearly as may be." You
may
be tempted to wait until after the officer
has had a chance to voluntarily dismiss
your case - some officers wait until the
last moment to do that (when the photo is
really blurry, or there is some other
defect in the ticket). But you are
taking a chance, as the judge could say
that the case has already begun and it is
now too late to do your PC. I
saw one defendant (successfully) make his
verbal challenge as he was walking through
the gate - he didn't want to give the
officer (who was already sitting up at the
table) any chance to commence his
testimony! If you're
doing it ahead of your court date... If
you are filing a written 170.6 before the
date of your court appearance, give it to
the window clerks at the courthouse.
You can do it in person, or by mail.
If you do it in person, ask the clerk to
date stamp an extra copy. Keep that
copy, and bring it to your court
appearance. Why? Read what one
defendant experienced: "I went
to arraignment and the judge stated he
did not see my challenge form in the
file. Thank goodness I had a copy
with a file stamp." If you
file it by mail, do it by Certified Mail,
Return Receipt requested, and also enclose
an extra copy of the challenge, a stamped
self-addressed envelope, and a note asking
the clerks to return a date stamped copy
to you in the envelope. Bring both
the green Return Receipt postcard and the
date-stamped copy to your court
appearance.
What
Happens
After You File If
you have filed a written 170.6 before the
date of your court appearance, some judges
may notify you by mail of their decision
(denying or granting the 170.6).
Others may make you show up for your
appointed court date, and tell you their
decision only then.
The
most common reason for a PC to be denied
is that it was "untimely" - not filed on
time. But I have often seen judges
deny PC's for other reasons having no
basis in law. Some examples:
Further
Reading
on
Peremptory
Challenge Fight
Your
Ticket has a detailed
discussion of Peremptory Challenge and its
deadlines, in Chapter 11. For a very detailed discussion of Peremptory Challenge and its deadlines, go to a law library and read Sections 17.13 through 17.16 in Chapter 17 , "Disqualification of Judge," in the CEB book California Criminal Law Procedure and Practice, by criminal defense attorney Alex Landon.
Advantages
of
Doing
a Challenge (Be
Sure to Read This) (A)
If
you have heard* that the judge who would
ordinarily hear your case never
grants reduced fines and/or "Second
Offender" 12-hour traffic school (assuming
you need it, and your violation occurred
before 7-1-11), getting another
judge will almost always improve your
chances. And since you are going to
be appearing in court anyway (to ask the
judge for the reduced fine and/or the
12-hour school), I suggest that you make
that appearance a trial, not an
arraignment. Why?
At a trial, the police have to show up -
see paragraph (B) below. Also, at a
trial, the judge will look at the photo of
the driver, and maybe he won't be
convinced, beyond a reasonable doubt, that
it looks like you. Case dismissed. *One
way to learn what a particular judge does is
to go observe one of his trial
sessions. For suggestions as to what
to do while you're there, see the purple box
in Section 3 of the Your Ticket page. (B)
Moving
your trial to another judge takes
away the economies of scale cities enjoy
when prosecuting multiple red light camera
cases during a single trial session.
It will cost them far more to send an
officer to your lone trial session
(especially if it's in a different
courthouse) than they will get as their
portion of your fine (should you lose), so
maybe they will decide not to send an
officer to your trial. If an officer
doesn't show up, you win -
automatically. (Note that on a red
light camera ticket, any officer will
suffice - it doesn't have to be the one
who signed your ticket.) (C) If you asked for a trial and got a "Trial Date" letter or a "Notice of Trial After Written Plea" containing a statement similar to this one formerly found in a notice from the Long Beach courts,
you
should
file a Peremptory Challenge. And if
it is too late to file a PC, you could try
a Challenge for Cause - the prejudice
being that by pre-determining your
penalty, the court has pre-judged your
case. One pro tem expressed
the proper stance for the court to
take: "After-trial traffic
school is discretionary - depending upon
what we find during the trial. It
won't be denied just because you asked
for a trial - that would be discouraging
your right to a trial." (Judge
Pro Tem Damon R. Swank, Culver City,
12-18-03). For more info about
traffic school, see the links at the
bottom of the traffic school editorial on
the Links page. (D)
Moving
your case to another courtroom may improve
your chances of there being a stenographer
present at your trial. (E)
Also
see "Possible Causes" in the "Challenge
for Cause" subsection, below.
General
Notes
about
Challenges If
you wish to use the forms below, you will
need to add the name of the judge, the
name of the court, and the division
number. If you are already in
court and are making a Peremptory
Challenge, you can do it verbally. When
you have successfully challenged a judge,
you don't get to choose who (or where) the
new judge will be. The
general
rule is that you get only one Peremptory
Challenge per case, but you can Challenge
for Cause repeatedly if during your trial
the judge's behavior provides new "cause."
You
can file a challenge before or at
arraignment in order to get a different
arraignment judge, but I don't recommend
it if you are planning to plead not guilty
and ask for a trial. By keeping your
one PC in reserve, if the trial judge
turns out to be the same one who arraigned
you, you won't be stuck with him!
170.6(a)(2) says, "The
fact
that a judge, court commissioner, or
referee has presided at or acted in
connection with a pretrial conference or
other hearing, proceeding, or motion
prior It
should be noted that if you have been
given an "assigned for all purposes" slip
prior to arraignment, you cannot wait
until your trial date to file your
Peremptory Challenge. An
"assigned for all purposes" slip given to
you prior to your Trial by Declaration
would raise another question: Can
you do a PC on the judge to whom your
Trial de Novo is assigned? I think
so, so long as it is your first PC.
However, there is no statutory law (a
section of the Penal Code, Code of Civil
Procedures, etc.) or case law (published
rulings made by an appeals court)
addressing this unusual situation, so you
will need to be prepared for an
argument. Perhaps you will make some
case law! What
about
two
PCs? Can you do two PCs, one of the
judge to whom your Trial by Declaration
was assigned, and a second one, of the
judge to whom your Trial de Novo is
assigned? After all, they are two
separate trials.... This is another
unusual situation not addressed by
statutory or case law. See also the section (above) entitled: "Where and How to File the Form."
(3)
Challenge
for Cause If
it's too late for you to file a Peremptory
Challenge, you may still be able to file a
Challenge for Cause, which can be filed at
the last minute. Challenges for
Cause are governed by Section
170.3(c) of the Code of
Civil Procedures. In
a Challenge for Cause, it does
matter what your reason is - you will have
to state it. There is an example,
way below, in the wallpaper area. Possible
Cause An
example of possible "cause" would be the
showing of a police-produced public
relations videotape about red light
cameras, as has occurred before
arraignment and trial sessions in some
cities. Even
if
you're just planned to file only a
Peremptory Challenge, you may want to take
a blank Challenge for Cause form with you
to court, just in case you need it. Fight Your Ticket says that a Challenge for Cause is heard by a judge different than the one who has been assigned to your case. If you are filing a Challenge for Cause ahead of time (not on your court date), file it at the clerk's window. but if something develops on the day of your trial, or even during the trial session, you may need to file your Challenge for Cause with the judge who is hearing your case. You can do it verbally, if necessary. See also the section (above) entitled: "Where and How to File the PC Form." For further reading on Challenge for Cause, read Fight Your Ticket, and go to a law library and read Sections 17.27 through 17.34 in Chapter 17, "Disqualification of Judge," in the CEB book California Criminal Law Procedure and Practice, by criminal defense attorney Alex Landon.
Forms
for Challenges
Added
10-25-06, revised 7-23-07 If you live or work closer to the county seat (the city which is the capital of the county) than to the city that is the location of the court named on your ticket, CVC 40502(b) allows you to ask that your case be moved to a court located within the city limits of the county seat. 40502.
The place specified in the notice to
appear shall be any of the following: Example:
If
you
have a Fremont ticket and you live or work
in Berkeley, you could move your ticket
away from the Fremont Hall of Justice and
to a court in Oakland, the capital of
Alameda County. Example: If you have a Daly City or South San Francisco ticket and you live or work close to Redwood City or anywhere south of it, you could move your ticket away from the courthouse in South San Francisco and to the court in Redwood City, the capital of the county. Example: If you have a Millbrae or City of San Mateo ticket and you live or work close to Redwood City or anywhere south of it, you could move your ticket away from the little courthouse in the City of San Mateo and to the court in Redwood City, the capital of the county. Rules
of Court 4.150
- 4.155 also apply. ( Alternate
link for Rules ) When
a "live" officer has pulled you over and
is starting to write you a ticket, right
then is the time you are supposed to
ask to be sent to the county seat.
But with a red light camera ticket, your
first opportunity to make the request will
be at arraignment*. You could say: The
courts
have held that once you make the demand,
if you meet the residency or employment
qualification, the jurisdiction shifts to
the court at the county seat (Smith
v. [Glendale] Municipal Court, 167
Cal.App.2d 534). *I
know of several defendants who submitted
their requests for Change of Venue by
mail - and they were granted!
See the suggested form, below, in the blue
"wallpaper" area. (If you are
applying by mail, do not use the
arraignment language, above.) What
if the local judge refuses to grant your
request? According to Brown, who
cites Smith (above), Drawbacks
of
Requesting
Change of Venue While
Change
of Venue can work in your favor (if, for
instance you were flashed in Lancaster,
far away from LA), it can also work
against you. The judge can send the ticket
to any court in the county seat (e.g., San
Pedro or West LA instead of Van Nuys or LA
Metro) per People
v. Beltran, 124 Cal.App.3d 335.
(San Pedro and Van Nuys are neighborhoods
within the City of LA, not separate
cities.) I
can foresee that another drawback to doing
a Change of Venue could be that you might
not be able to combine it with a Trial by
Declaration. I know of no one who
has tried such a combination. At the
very least it would be tricky - you would
need to request the Change of Venue at
least several weeks before the "respond to
the court" date printed on your ticket (or
any extension of it), and then hope that
the court to which the case is re-assigned
will send you a courtesy notice confirming
the re-assignment and the due date. And
you would need to make sure that no matter
what, you submit your request for a TBD by
the due date.
Scroll
down for examples. --------------------------------- |
Peremptory Challenge
----------------
________________________________
(Name, address and phone of Defendant)
________________________________
________________________________
________________________________
Defendant in Pro Per
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
[[[county name]]] SUPERIOR COURT
____________ COURTHOUSE
People of the State of
California) Case No. __________
Plaintiff,
)
Division/Courtroom _____
vs.
)
)
PEREMPTORY CHALLENGE
____________________________, )
(Code of Civil
Defendant.
) Procedures 170.6)
_________________________________)
I,
___________________________, declare:
1. I am the defendant in the
above-entitled action.
2. That Judge / Commissioner
____________, the judge or commissioner before whom the trial
of the aforesaid action is pending (or to whom it is assigned)
is prejudiced against my interest so that I believe that I
cannot have a fair and impartial trial or hearing before said
Judge or Commissioner.
WHEREFORE, Defendant requests ex parte, per
CCP Section 170.6, that said Judge / Commissioner be
disqualified from hearing the above-entitled matter.
I declare under penalty of perjury under
the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true
and correct.
Dated: ___________
[[[sig]]]_________________________
[[[typed name]]],
Defendant in Pro Per
Challenge for Cause
----------------
________________________________
(Name, address and phone of Defendant)
________________________________
________________________________
________________________________
Defendant in Pro Per
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
[[[county name]]] SUPERIOR COURT
____________ COURTHOUSE
People of the State of
California) Case No. _________
Plaintiff,
)
Division/Courtroom _____
vs.
)
MOTION AND AFFIDAVIT
)
TO DISQUALIFY JUDGE
____________________________, )
OR COMMISSIONER FOR CAUSE
Defendant.
) (Code of Civil
_________________________________) Procedures 170.3(c))
I,
___________________________, declare:
1. I am the defendant in the
above-entitled action.
2. That on ___________________, the
date set for my trial or arraignment in said action and
approximately 5 (five) minutes after the hour set for me to
appear for trial or arraignment and approximately 10 (ten)
minutes before the judge took the bench, I was present in
Division 3 when courtroom personnel showed a five-minute-long
videotape. That said showing was made on a full-sized
television set in a manner which was clearly intended to be,
and which in fact was, visible and audible to the public
assembled in the courtroom. That the subject of said
videotape was red light cameras ("cameras"). That said
videotape was produced and provided by the City of ______ (the
"City"). That said videotape included footage of members
of the general public indicating their approval of the
cameras, but did not include balancing interviews with members
of the public having a differing opinion. That as to the
reliability of the cameras and of the evidence obtained there
from, the videotape included the following assertions of
reliability, but did not include, discuss or mention differing
opinions.
(i)
"...proven all over the world."
(ii)
"...triggers the camera and flash only if a vehicle is
detected crossing the limit line after the light has turned
red."
(iii) "The entire
process is secure and is conducted in a judicially-approved
manner, maintaining the chain of custody of the evidence."
3. That as to the foundational
requirements for the operation of the cameras, the videotape
included the following statements and images asserting the
City's compliance, but did not include, discuss or mention
differing opinions.
(i)
"Aside from public notification, a formal public hearing was
conducted as required by law."
(ii)
Announcer says: "The City's Police Department was
required to post signs indicating that photo enforcement was
in use," while image on screen is of a warning sign on a
street in the City.
(iii) Announcer
says: "The police department was also required to issue
warning notices to violators for a period of 30 days before
actual enforcement began," while image is of a citation marked
"Warning Notice."
4. That said action against me is
based solely upon evidence produced by a red light camera
operated by the City. That hearing of the action has
been assigned "for all purposes" to Judge / Commissioner
___________, who regularly presides in Division 3. That
based upon the Court's having permitted the showing of said
videotape containing the above-enumerated one-sided,
unbalanced and conclusory assertions bearing on questions
properly answered only at trial, I entertain a doubt that said
Judge or Commissioner, before whom the trial or arraignment in
the aforesaid action is pending, will be able to be impartial.
WHEREFORE, Defendant requests ex parte, per
CCP Section 170.3(c), that said Judge or Commissioner proceed
no further and that another judge or commissioner or judge be
assigned to hear this proceeding.
I declare under penalty of perjury under
the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true
and correct.
Dated: ___________
[[[sig]]]________________________
[[[typed name]]],
Defendant in Pro Per
Change of Venue
----------------
[[[The Change of Venue
below is an example of an attempt to move a case from the
Fremont courthouse to a courthouse in Oakland, the county seat
of Alameda County. The COV below consists of five parts
- the Application, a Memorandum of Points and Authorities, a
Declaration, a Proof of Service, and an optional transmittal
letter. If you are doing your COV request by mail, send it in to the
court at least a couple weeks before any due date (the
"respond by" deadline, or an arraignment date you've set up)
so that the court has time to send you a reply. If you
get no response from them, you will still need to take action,
or appear, by whatever due date you have. Or, if you
want to guarantee getting a response (although it still
may not be the positive response you hoped for) you could send
this COV in, combined with a not guilty plea and a check for
the bail. In that case, you would add "PLEA OF NOT
GUILTY AND" to the title below, and "enters a plea of NOT
GUILTY and" after "hereby" in the first sentence. If you
are entering a not guilty plea and there are some dates that
you would not be available for trial, note the same in the
transmittal letter.
Tickets in Los Angeles
County: The county seat is the City of Los Angeles, and
in the City limits there are at least five courthouses
handling traffic tickets. While you can ask for a particular
one you prefer, the transferring court is free to ignore your
choice and transfer the case to whichever one it prefers (see
P. v. Beltran). Most often it will be the big Metropolitan
traffic court at 1945 S. Hill St., Los Angeles, CA
90007. The other traffic courts in the City of LA are
West LA, East LA, San Pedro, and Van Nuys (SP and VN are
actually part of the City of LA, not separate cities).
See the list on the court's website, at
http://www.lacourt.org/generalinfo/generalinfo.aspx ]]]
[[[CHANGE OF VENUE, FIRST PAGE: THE APPLICATION]]]
________________________________
(Name, address and phone of Defendant)
________________________________
________________________________
________________________________
Defendant in Pro Per
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
[[[ALAMEDA COUNTY]]] SUPERIOR COURT
[[[FREMONT]]] COURTHOUSE
People of the State of
California) Ticket No. _______
Plaintiff,
)
Division/Courtroom _____
vs.
)
)
APPLICATION TO TRANSFER
____________________________, )
ACTION TO COUNTY SEAT
Defendant.
) (Vehicle Code 40502(b))
_________________________________)
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that
Defendant ________________ hereby applies to this Court for an
Order, pursuant to California Vehicle Code Section 40502(b),
to transfer this action to the court in the County Seat of
__________ County, located at: [[[full address of the traffic
court at the County Seat. ]]].
This action results from an alleged traffic violation, to wit:
California Vehicle Code Section 21453 (red light automated
enforcement).
This Application is made on the ground that Defendant lives
[[[and/or works]]] closer to the County Seat than to this
Court. (See Defendant's declaration, attached.) Had
Defendant been cited by a "live" police officer for this
offense Defendant would have at the time of the traffic stop
requested to appear at the County Seat, in accordance with CVC
40502(b). However, Defendant received notice of this
alleged violation via the U.S. mail (it is a red light camera
ticket), so this Application to this Court is the first
opportunity has had to exercise his or her right to request
appearance at the County Seat.
This Application is further based upon the Points and
Authorities attached hereto, the Declaration of the Defendant
attached hereto, all papers and records on file with this
court, and upon all oral arguments at the time of any hearing
on this matter.
Dated: ___________
[[[sig]]]_______________________
[[[typed name]]],
Defendant in Pro Per
[[[CHANGE OF VENUE, CONT'D, NEW PAGE: POINTS AND
AUTHORITIES]]]
IN THE MATTER OF
PEOPLE V. _______, TICKET # ___________
POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF TRANSFER
ARGUMENT
I. WHEN A NOTICE TO APPEAR IS ISSUED BY A PEACE OFFICER FOR
VIOLATION OF THE VEHICLE CODE, THE PLACE FOR APPEARANCE MUST
BE THE COURT AT THE COUNTY SEAT, IF SO DEMANDED BY THE PERSON
CITED.
When a peace officer cites a person for violation of the
Vehicle Code and issues a Notice to Appear, the place for
appearance is governed by Section 40502 of that Code, which
states in pertinent part:
"40502. The place specified in the Notice to Appear shall be…
"(b) Upon demand of the person arrested, before a municipal
court judge or other magistrate having jurisdiction of the
offense at the county seat of the county in which the offense
is alleged to have been committed…"
Subdivisions (a) and (c) of Section 40502 respectively name
the “nearest or most accessible” magistrate or a “person
authorized to receive a deposit of bail” as other places that
may be specified as the place to appear. With respect to these
two choices, the decision lies within the arresting officer’s
discretion. Subdivision (b), however, requires the place to
appear to be the county seat whenever 1) the arrested person’s
residence or business address is closer to the county seat
than to the nearest municipal or justice court, and 2) the
arrested person demands that the place to appear be the county
seat. In Smith v. Municipal Court (1959) 167 Cal.App.2d 534,
538, the similar wording of former Section 739(c) of the
Vehicle Code was construed to require that “[i]f a demand
therefore is made by the arrestee, the officer must specify as
the place of appearance a municipal court within the judicial
district at the county seat or at the demand of the arrestee,
before a magistrate in the judicial district…"
II. WHEN A DEFENDANT HAD NO PRIOR OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE A DEMAND
FOR APPEARANCE AT THE COUNTY SEAT COURT, THE ACTION MUST BE
TRANSFERRED THERE FROM THE NON-COUNTY-SEAT COURT WHEN SUCH
TRANSFER IS REQUESTED AT ARRAIGNMENT.
Section 1462.2 of the Penal Code states that “Except as
provided by the Vehicle Code,” the proper court for the trial
of a misdemeanor is in the judicial district in which the
offense is alleged to have occurred. The fact that this
section specifically refers to the Vehicle Code shows that the
Legislature contemplated provision of Vehicle Code Section
40502 as determining trial venue for Vehicle Code offenses
where a Notice to Appear is issued. Section 1462.2 states that
when the action is commenced in a court other than the proper
court for trial, it may nevertheless be tried there, “unless
the defendant, at the time he pleads, requests an order
transferring the action or proceeding to the proper court.” It
continues, “If after such request it appears that the action
or proceeding was not commenced in the proper court, the court
shall order the action or proceeding transferred to the proper
court.” The proper time for making the motion is therefore
immediately following a not-guilty plea at arraignment. In
Smith, the court stated that the respondent court “was without
discretion to deny the motion to transfer (167 Cal.App.2d at
541).
The court at the “county seat” is a court located within the
city limit of the city in which the seat of government of the
county is located. Government Code Section 23600. See also
People v. Beltran (1981) 124 Cal.App.3d 335.
Dated: ___________
[[[sig]]]_______________________
[[[typed name]]],
Defendant in Pro Per
[[[CHANGE OF VENUE, CONT'D, NEW PAGE: DECLARATION]]]
IN THE MATTER OF
PEOPLE V. _______, TICKET # ___________
DECLARATION OF
________[[[[your name]]]]____________
I, ____________________, declare:
1. I am the defendant in the above-entitled action; the facts
stated herein are within my own personal knowledge and, if
called to testify thereto, I could and would competently do
so.
2. My residence [[[ and/or, My principal place of employment
]]]] is/are located at [[[ address ]]]] in [[[city]]],
California.
I declare, under penalty of perjury under the laws of the
State of California, that the foregoing is true and correct.
Dated: ___________
[[[sig]]]_______________________
[[[typed name]]],
Declarant
[[[CHANGE OF VENUE, CONT'D, NEW PAGE: PROOF OF
SERVICE]]]
[[MAKE SIX SETS OF THE APPLICATION/POINTS/DECLARATION ABOVE. SIGN
EACH SET IN THE THREE PLACES SHOWN. THEN HAVE AN
ADULT FRIEND (YOU CANNOT DO THIS PART YOURSELF) MAIL ONE SET
TO EACH OF THE FOUR
PEOPLE LISTED BELOW. THEN HAVE YOUR FRIEND (YOUR SERVER)
FILL OUT AND SIGN TWO COPIES OF THIS PROOF OF SERVICE. ]]
IN THE MATTER OF PEOPLE V. _______, TICKET # ___________
PROOF OF SERVICE BY MAIL
- CCP SECTION 1013a(3)
I, [[[ not the defendant ]]]] declare as follows: I am
employed in or reside in the County of ________, State of
CALIFORNIA where this mailing will occur; I am over the age of
eighteen (18) years and not a party to the cause; my residence
[[[[ business ]]] address is [[[ address ]]].
On ___[[[[date]]]]]_____, I served the within APPLICATION TO
TRANSFER ACTION TO COUNTY SEAT on the interested parties in
the above-entitled action by placing true copies thereof in a
separate sealed envelope, with the postage thereon fully
prepaid, in the United States Postal Service mailbox at [[[
city ]]], County of [[[ ]]], California, the said
envelopes being addressed to:
Officer ______ _______
[[[Fremont]]] Police Department
[[[2000 Stevenson Blvd.]]]
[[[Fremont, CA 94538]]]
City Prosecutor
City Hall
[[[39100 Liberty St.]]]
[[[Fremont, CA 94537]]]
City Attorney
City Hall
[[[39100 Liberty St.]]]
[[[Fremont, CA 94537]]]
District Attorney, County
of [[[Alameda]]]
[[[1225 Fallon St., #900]]]
[[[Oakland, CA 94612]]]
I am aware that service
made pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 1013a(3) upon
motion of a party served shall be presumed invalid if the
postal cancellation date or postage meter date on the envelope
is more than one day after the date of deposit for mailing
contained in the affidavit.
I certify and declare under penalty of perjury under the laws
of the State of CALIFORNIA that the foregoing is true and
correct.
Executed on ____[[[date]]]______, at ____[[[city]]]________,
CALIFORNIA.
[[[sig]]]_____________________
[[[server's name, typed]]]
[[[CHANGE OF VENUE,
CONT'D, NEW PAGE: FILING THE PAPERS AT COURT, AND THE
(OPTIONAL) TRANSMITTAL LETTER]]]
[[[ATTACH A SIGNED ORIGINAL OF
THE PROOF OF SERVICE TO THE BACK OF A SET OF THE SIGNED
ORIGINALS OF THE APPLICATION/POINTS/DECLARATION
(ABOVE). MAKE A PHOTOCOPY OF THAT ORIGINAL. HANDWRITE "ORIGINAL" IN THE
UPPER RIGHTHAND CORNER OF THE FIRST PAGE OF THE ORIGINAL. HANDWRITE "COPY" IN THE UPPER
RIGHTHAND CORNER OF THE PHOTOCOPY. IF YOU ARE GOING TO
THE COURT IN PERSON TO FILE THE PAPERS, TAKE BOTH THE ORIGINAL
AND THE COPY WITH YOU, AND ASK THE CLERK TO "FILE STAMP" THE
COPY, WHICH YOU WILL KEEP AS YOUR PROOF THAT YOU FILED THE
PAPERS. IF YOU ARE FILING BY MAIL, USE THE FORM LETTER
BELOW. WHEN YOU ARE ALL DONE WITH FILING, YOU SHOULD
HAVE A FILE-STAMPED PHOTOCOPY OF THE PROOF OF SERVICE, PLUS AN
EXTRA ORIGINAL OF THE PROOF OF SERVICE WHICH COULD BE OF USE
IF FOR SOME REASON THE ORIGINAL WHICH YOU FILED WITH THE COURT
DOES NOT REACH THE JUDGE.]]]
________________________________
(Name, address and phone of Defendant)
________________________________
________________________________
IN THE MATTER OF PEOPLE V. _______, TICKET # ___________
To: Court Clerk, Superior Court (Certified Mail, with Return
Receipt - optional, but strongly recommended)
[[[Fremont]]] Courthouse
[[[39439 Paseo Padre Parkway]]]
[[[Fremont, CA 94538]]]
Dear Court Clerk:
I am enclosing two copies
of my Application to Transfer Action to County Seat.
Please file the one marked "original," and "file stamp" the
other (marked "copy") and return it to me, in the stamped
self-addressed return envelope I have enclosed.
Thank you,
Enclosed:
Original of Application, with original of Proof of Service
Copy of Application and Proof of Service
Stamped self-addressed envelope with extra ounce of postage
--------------------------------- RED LIGHT CAMERAS www.highwayrobbery.net www.highwayrobbery.net |