Traffic stop, officer confiscated my firearms.

[Fargo]

I just couldn't believe she had dozens of pages printed out from INGO with tabs, yellow highlighter and all. She handed it to me and asked me to read it. By that time I was so flustered, I couldn't read anything. Blood pressure was up, glasses were steaming, all I could see for sure was pictures of my bird dog in the left column of every page! She didn't like it when the judge allowed me to take the 5th and not admit to anything in the contents. Looking back, I probably could have objected because it was not listed in her list of evidence.

No, you would not have had a valid objection because it was not evidence she was introducing on direct and so it is not discoverable. She only needs to discover what she intends to present as direct evidence during her case. Materials used to impeach you, like it appears she used them are not discoverable because quite frankly only you know what you are going to say and so those contradictory statements only come in after you open the door to them.

I once saw a criminal defendant get up and testify and then the deputy prosecutor proceeded to play some of the defendant's podcasts for the jury which contradicted his testimony. He didn't have to discover those because they only came in because the defendant testified in contradiction to them.

Also, your 5th Amendment stand is pretty easy to defeat in a case like this and I don't know that your objection was properly sustained. Unless writing this thread was a crime in itself, asking you if you wrote it probably isn't going to fall under the 5th Am. Also, there are ways the prosecutor can grant you criminal immunity for any statements you make and poof, you can be compelled to testify. She probably didn't bother in this case because she already knew she was winning without it.

You should also keep in mind that this whole thread opens you up to potential future criminal liability and also could definitely be used against you should you testify in such a criminal case. Once you take the stand in your defense, the 5th Am. doesn't apply. Normally, jeopardy doesn't attach based upon a civil infraction under current Indiana and Federal caselaw so you sit open to potential criminal charges until the statutes of limitation run which is 5 years on a D felony and 2 years on a misdemeanor.

I have seldom seen such a trainwreck.

Joe

 

[TTravis]

Also, your 5th Amendment stand is pretty easy to defeat in a case like this and I don't know that your objection was properly sustained. Unless writing this thread was a crime in itself, asking you if you wrote it probably isn't going to fall under the 5th Am. Also, there are ways the prosecutor can grant you criminal immunity for any statements you make and poof, you can be compelled to testify. She probably didn't bother in this case because she already knew she was winning without it.

You should also keep in mind that this whole thread opens you up to potential future criminal liability and also could definitely be used against you should you testify in such a criminal case. Once you take the stand in your defense, the 5th Am. doesn't apply. Normally, jeopardy doesn't attach based upon a civil infraction under current Indiana and Federal caselaw so you sit open to potential criminal charges until the statutes of limitation run which is 5 years on a D felony and 2 years on a misdemeanor.

I have seldom seen such a trainwreck.

Joe

There were a couple moments when I did not fully understand what was happening and why. One one point, prosecution objected to me taking the 5th on some question and there was some back and forth between her and the judge. I wound up pointing out the potential charges in the PC affidavit and that got her objection overruled. The judge also mentioned that I could not and would not be charged with anything additional, she mentioned double jeopardy, and this would be the end of it. My head was spinning, but it sounded good to me.

 

[fullmetaljesus]

There were a couple moments when I did not fully understand what was happening and why. One one point, prosecution objected to me taking the 5th on some question and there was some back and forth between her and the judge. I wound up pointing out the potential charges in the PC affidavit and that got her objection overruled. The judge also mentioned that I could not and would not be charged with anything additional, she mentioned double jeopardy, and this would be the end of it. My head was spinning, but it sounded good to me.

There! Right there, you admit to having no idea what is going on. You're like a child with a head injury constantly poking a bee hive. "Haha! bees you can hurt me im wearing a shirt....ow! wait! hey! OW!"

you had little to no understanding to the severity of your charges nor the severity of your actions when letting your kid drive. You have no respect for the system to go in there and try and say "nahnahanha boo boo you can touch me 5th am. this 5th am. that" You are displaying such ignorance its hardly conceivable. and then to top it all off you come parading such recklessness on this board "hey guys im a victim." "ima fight the system hur hur hur" "Wow they done beat me good"

it scares me youre allowed to waltz around with a gun on your hip and a license to drive. you are a danger to yourself and those around you. I think you should be stripped of your lic to drive and carry until you can prove you are responsible enough to handle such dangerous machines.

 

[Fargo]

There were a couple moments when I did not fully understand what was happening and why. One one point, prosecution objected to me taking the 5th on some question and there was some back and forth between her and the judge. I wound up pointing out the potential charges in the PC affidavit and that got her objection overruled. The judge also mentioned that I could not and would not be charged with anything additional, she mentioned double jeopardy, and this would be the end of it. My head was spinning, but it sounded good to me.

The judge is incorrect that a civil conviction on this automatically bars you from being charged or prosecuted criminally. Jeopardy does not attach on a civil infraction or ordinance conviction unless it is determined under the "mendoza-martinez" test that the civil damages equate to a punishment of a criminal nature.

Kennedy v.
Mendoza-Martinez, 372 U.S. 144 (1963). Those factors are:
(1) Whether the sanction involves an affirmative disability or restraint, (2)
whether it has historically been regarded as a punishment, (3) whether it comes
into play only on a finding of scienter, (4) whether its operation will promote
the traditional aims of punishment – retribution and deterrence, (5) whether the
behavior to which it applies is already a crime, (6) whether an alternative
purpose to which it may rationally be connected is assignable for it, and (7)
whether it appears excessive in relation to the alternative purpose assigned.

See Boss v. State for further analysis.

http://www.ai.org/judiciary/opinions/pdf/02181102ehf.pdf

You certainly could be charged for criminal conduct here at the prosecutor's discretion and I think it unlikely you could get those charges dismissed upon double jeopardy grounds. The judge of the Mooresville town court has no ability to prevent the prosecutor from filing on you.

Joe

 

[TTravis]

There! Right there, you admit to having no idea what is going on. You're like a child with a head injury constantly poking a bee hive. "Haha! bees you can hurt me im wearing a shirt....ow! wait! hey! OW!"

you had little to no understanding to the severity of your charges nor the severity of your actions when letting your kid drive. You have no respect for the system to go in there and try and say "nahnahanha boo boo you can touch me 5th am. this 5th am. that" You are displaying such ignorance its hardly conceivable. and then to top it all off you come parading such recklessness on this board "hey guys im a victim." "ima fight the system hur hur hur" "Wow they done beat me good"

it scares me youre allowed to waltz around with a gun on your hip and a license to drive. you are a danger to yourself and those around you. I think you should be stripped of your lic to drive and carry until you can prove you are responsible enough to handle such dangerous machines.

There is a difference between having no idea what is going on and not fulliny understanding a couple points.

Even the judge at the trial said that this was about as minor at it gets. She said that everyone around there lets their kid practice driving some before they have a license, I just happened to get caught.

I couldn't care less about what you think of me when you make such comments.

 

[TTravis]

The judge is incorrect that a civil conviction on this automatically bars you from being charged or prosecuted criminally. Jeopardy does not attach on a civil infraction or ordinance conviction unless it is determined under the "mendoza-martinez" test that the civil damages equate to a punishment of a criminal nature.



See Boss v. State for further analysis.

http://www.ai.org/judiciary/opinions/pdf/02181102ehf.pdf

You certainly could be charged for criminal conduct here at the prosecutor's discretion and I think it unlikely you could get those charges dismissed upon double jeopardy grounds. The judge of the Mooresville town court has no ability to prevent the prosecutor from filing on you.

Joe

Theoretically you may be correct, but in reality, it's all over.

 

[lrahm]

How many prosecutors does anyone know who would go searching the internet for forum conversations for someone contesting a traffic citation? I could see them "googling" his name to see if anything popped up that they could use (but even the admissibility of that info would be limited if it did not pertain to the case at hand) however this thread would not come up unless they were searching for his screen name (I do not recall but did the OP post his real name on this thread?).

It does strongly suggest that someone on this board or a friend of someone who was shown it, forwarded the info to the prosecutor.

Not a big deal, imo, as I have always felt that people should be honest and shouldn't say anything privately (or in any conversation) that one is afraid to say or repeat publicly.

Not many prosecutors but the staff might. I know of several companies who have someone do it on a regular basis. I agree that the logical reason is that someone saw it and passed the info along.

 

[Denny347]

10,000 members...needle in a stack of needles. The interwebs aint private.

 

[Titanium_Frost]

I can't say that I have ever seen a person who defended himself, win.

I fought 3 infraction tickets and won, does that count?

 

[lrahm]

I fought 3 infraction tickets and won, does that count?

That counts. Doesn't happen very often.

 

[TTravis]

10,000 members...needle in a stack of needles. The interwebs aint private.

It's even scarier than that. You don't have to post something on a popular site. The webbots and crawlers that Google uses to index information will find their way into the most obscure places. And the information stays out there for a long long time.

I've done work in this area except I was trying to make information more available and appear at the top of a search result. Usually it doesn't take long for the search engines do discover something and index it.

 

[Titanium_Frost]

That counts. Doesn't happen very often.

Now you can say you know only one person who did that!

It helps when you actually didn't do anything you were accused of either

 

[jrmdeputy]

Simply, you were IMPAIRED at .07 BAC. The officer had to make the situation as safe as possible for all concerned. Be glad your car was not towed and you were not put in jail for public intox. That would have cost you a boat load to fix. I could expalin all the dynamics involved in what you experienced but you have one thing missing, what was the class c infraction for?

 

[Hoosierbuck]

A couple little things-
1) "He who represents himself in court has an idiot for a lawyer and a fool for a client." was put out by a lawyer. He was generally considered to be pretty smart notwithstanding the lawyer thing. You may have heard of him, his name was Abraham Lincoln.
2) I check the internet (Google, Facebook, Myspace) for info on people and witnesses for my trials. DUH. People are stupid and put all kinds of things on the internet that has no business being made public. If you are going to give me the rope to tie you up with, I'll use it.
3) I didn't take the info to whoever "tried" this case, but if somebody did, it is nobody's fault but the OP's for putting it out there.
This whole thing is well summed up by others who characterized it as a train wreck.

HB

 

[j706]

I am not surprised about the 911 call during discovery. We get at least 10 - 15 calls per night on cars driving in an erratic manner.

This^^^ It seems to me that anytime someone gets annoyed with another driver they call 911 to report a intoxicated driver. It is to the point that it is often ignored. A 911 intoxicated driver call with no caller info is not a call IMO...unless i get dispatched on it. Even then I have never took a callers word to justify a stop. Lead information only. No violation in my presence, no stop.

 

[MrYesterday]

I'm waiting for....
I pulled up to the house at bout seven or eight,
I yelled to the cabbie 'Yo home, smell ya later!'
I looked at my kingdom,
I was finally there!
To sit on my throne as the prince of Bel-Air!

 

[lrahm]

This^^^ It seems to me that anytime someone gets annoyed with another driver they call 911 to report a intoxicated driver. It is to the point that it is often ignored. A 911 intoxicated driver call with no caller info is not a call IMO...unless i get dispatched on it. Even then I have never took a callers word to justify a stop. Lead information only. No violation in my presence, no stop.

I agree, we have to have PC to stop.

 

[protias]

I agree, we have to have PC to stop.

Not a RAS?

 

[lrahm]

Not a RAS?

We can't fall into the trap of a mad girlriend calling 911 and saying her boyfriend is east on Washington Ave. drunk. What do they say about hell knows no fury than that of a mad woman (someone correct me). A reasonable ammount of suspicion might work in some cases but not others. PC and RAS can come in different forms. For instance a driver calls and states she just saw a guy strike a girl in a car. There is both PC and RAS to stop the car. Also in that case the officer would be obligated by law to stop and check the welfare of the female.

Just tonight we had a call on a car driving slow on US 41. The officers arrived and saw the car driving slow. It turned out to be a couple that was lost. PC was established because the officers saw the car driving slow.

Now if we receive a call that a blue camaro with Illinois plate XXX - 123 is driving all over the road. The officer see the car and watches it and everything appears great. He still has to establish PC for the stop.

I have never minded stopping cars. You would have to go some distance to get a ticket from me (reckless driving, speed contest, following too close). I stop a lot of cars for minor violations and give a lot of warnings. I do check for license status and insurance. But I always have PC for the stop

 

[lrahm]

I hope I made sense. I did not mean to ramble.