La mayoría de los individuos en NJ Tribunal Municipal de optar por no contratar a un abogado, a menudo a su propio riesgo. Sin ambages, un acusado sin representación no sabe lo que se está metiendo. Creen que será fácil de averiguar, después de todo, es sólo una multa de tráfico ... pero que a menudo terminan caminando sin rumbo, pasando horas en la Corte y sin la más mínima noción de cómo hacer frente a su materia. Por el contrario, un abogado conoce las defensas viables, conoce las reglas del juego, sabe con quién hablar, dónde ir, dónde pararse, qué decir y, a menudo los actores involucrados (el Fiscal, Director y Juez). Este tutorial está diseñado para ayudar a los acusados ​​confundidos caminar por las turbias aguas de aparecer en NJ Tribunal Municipal, sin abogado. Recuerde, no estoy sugiriendo que usted debe ir sin abogado, sino todo lo contrario. Pero si lo hace, usted encontrará algunos si no todos de los siguientes materiales de ayuda. El formato de pregunta y respuesta es muy sencillo y fácil de leer, teniendo el demandado desde el punto donde se emite el boleto a la disposición final de la materia, el pago de las multas en la ventana (thats a la derecha, que bien puede alegar ni encontrarse culpable de algo).



M entradas y tiene una fecha de comparecencia en la lista. ¿Me acaba de aparecer en esa fecha?

En cada sesión del Tribunal en cada Tribunal Municipal hay un puñado de personas que se encuentran en una situación frustrante que les obliga a hacer acto de presencia innecesaria Tribunal extra. Si nos fijamos en las citaciones de tráfico se verá hacia el final de las palabras "Notice to Appear", con una fecha de comparecencia por escrito justo debajo. Es comprensible que muchos ven en ese idioma, consulte la fecha de corte y la conclusión de que debería aparecer en esa fecha y la hora. No tan rápido. A la izquierda de la fecha de corte es una caja que está bien marcada o no marcada "requiere presentarse en corte." Si se comprueba, entonces sí, usted debe comparecer en corte si quiere o no. Sin embargo, si no se comprueba, una de dos cosas ha sucedido. Ya sea a) el funcionario omitió comprobar requiere presentarse en corte, o más probablemente B) que no tienen que aparecer. Una pista de lo que está pasando en la parte posterior de su billete. Gire el billete y dos tercios de la manera en letras rojas que dice:

"Si usted desea declararse no culpable, usted debe notificar al tribunal en la dirección y número de teléfono como se muestra a continuación por lo menos 7 días antes de la fecha de corte que aparece en la parte delantera de este billete. Si usted no notifica a la Corte, puede ser necesario para que usted pueda hacer presentaciones adicionales de la Corte. "

¿Qué significa eso? Esto significa que si usted tenía un billete de pago que no se comprueba "requiere presentarse en corte" y se presentó a Corte sin poner en primer lugar, usted ha perdido un viaje. Tribunal se agrava lo suficiente sin necesidad de que se les diga lo que tienes que volver en otro momento. La "Fecha de comparecencia" no es la fecha que aparezca si la casilla no está marcada. En la actualidad, es la fecha en que usted debe pagar su multa si va a pagar la multa. Si quieres ir a la corte y llegar a un acuerdo con el Fiscal, asegúrese de llamar a la corte antes de tiempo. (7 días, por cierto, es una guía más que cualquier regla dura y rápida). De esta forma el tribunal programará el asunto cuando el oficial está disponible. Invariablemente, 5 o 6 personas se presentan en la corte después de haber leído lo que parece ser el lenguaje claro en el billete y se le dio la vuelta y dijo que va a recibir una nueva fecha de audiencia en el correo.



Mi nota para la Corte dice que yo debería aparecer a las 9:00 am. ¿Debo llegar temprano para que yo pueda conseguir el salto en todos los demás?

Probablemente no sea necesario. Corte Municipal está muy descrito por el conocido adagio "date prisa y esperar". Su aviso indica un tiempo de inicio, pero la Corte casi nunca comienzan a la hora de inicio. Algunos tribunales apartarse de esta práctica general, pero más a menudo que el juez no tomará la banca por hasta una hora después que la Corte comienza oficialmente. Usted debe llegar a la Corte por el tiempo de inicio, pero para llegar a media cancha una hora más temprano no ofrece ninguna ventaja.



Tengo que esperar una hora para que el juez toma el banquillo? ¿Por qué?

Se podría pensar que el juez, que está aprendiendo, está leyendo libros de derecho y el cepillado para arriba en sus habilidades de juzgar, pero lo que se suele hacer es simplemente esperar a que la Fiscalía para conseguir su acto juntos. Por lo general, la sesión de Corte está en gran parte a cargo de la Fiscalía que trabaja en todos los asuntos que pueda para presentar ante el juez. Él pone las clavijas y el juez les derriba. Si el juez fuera a salir antes, decía su discurso de apertura (explicado más adelante) y luego no tienen casos de moverse. Se sentaba allí rascándose la cabeza hasta que el Fiscal poner algo delante de él. Así que, lo creas o no, por conveniencia, no tiene mucho sentido para que el juez tome el banco de inmediato.



Estoy programada para el Tribunal de Justicia en la mañana y me supongo que ir a trabajar ese día. ¿Por cuánto tiempo es que todo esto va a tomar?

Más de lo esperado. Hay momentos en tu vida donde te sientes como un número, y este es uno de esos momentos. Usted puede estar sorprendido de encontrar que usted y hasta cien o más personas están programadas para el Tribunal, al mismo tiempo. Si el aviso dice que estar allí el martes a las 9:00 am, lo mismo ocurre con todos los demás previo aviso. Por eso, cuando es el Tribunal más? Para tomar prestada una frase de Yogi Berra, "la Corte no ha terminado hasta que se acabó." Alguien va a ser el primero, alguien va a ser el último y puede haber tres, cuatro o incluso cinco horas en el medio. Es posible que desee informar a la oficina / centro de trabajo tendrá el día libre.

(Nota: si te gusta esperar en las líneas, el Tribunal Municipal es el lugar para ti No es la línea en la que el check in, la línea del Fiscal y de la línea para pagar sus multas a veces te encuentras en una línea que es.. esperando para entrar en otra línea. estar preparado.)



¿Tengo que hacer el check in?

Muchas cortes tienen un check-in, que significa que usted tiene que encontrar la ventana donde el secretario de la corte, o en la actualidad, la oficina administradora de la Corte es, y le aconsejará han aparecido. A veces la forma en que esto funciona es que llegue a la persona en la ventana y te dicen que realmente no hay control en el procedimiento, o que va a ser revisado en el interior de la sala del tribunal. Si ese es el caso, usted debe entrar en la sala de audiencias y encontrar un asiento y espere hasta que su nombre se llama. La razón de este procedimiento de registro es que, sorprendentemente, muchas personas no aparecen para el Tribunal. El Tribunal quiere dejar de lado las cuestiones para las personas que se han presentado y se ocupará de aquellos que no aparecen más tarde.



¿Qué pasa si decido no aparecen?

No es una buena idea. Si usted está programada para el Tribunal y no se presenta o si la fecha de la corte en su billete ha pasado sin que ponerse en contacto con la Oficina del Tribunal, una orden de arresto en su contra puede emitir.



¿Qué sucede cuando el juez toma el banco?

En algún momento el juez finalmente emerge de algún cuarto de atrás después de lo cual ofrecerá su discurso de apertura. Se le pide a "levantarse" y se anunció que la Corte está en sesión. El Juez de gracia le permite sentarse de nuevo y, en general, le informará de lo siguiente:

"Usted tiene ciertos derechos en la Corte, es decir, el derecho a ser leídos los cargos, el derecho a un juicio, el derecho a un abogado, el derecho a un aplazamiento razonable, el derecho a permanecer en silencio. Usted tiene el derecho de citar a testigos e interrogar a los testigos de la Fiscalía. El Fiscal, como en cualquier proceso penal, tiene que probar su culpabilidad "más allá de una duda razonable." Si no te gusta la conclusión del Tribunal o de la pena impuesta, usted tiene 20 días para apelar ....

(Recurso de casación, por cierto, no es un do-sobre. El caso no se oye todo de nuevo en un tribunal superior. La audiencia que tiene en la Corte Municipal es todo lo que obtienes, y una apelación es una revisión de dicho Tribunal Municipal llevando a cabo.)

... Todos los procedimientos en el Tribunal se están grabando con el propósito de los recursos por lo que no debería haber ninguna conversación. "

(Estas cosas no se habla no suena como tiene que ser un gran problema pero lo es. La mayoría del Tribunal se ponen muy arrogante sobre el silencio en la sala. Los teléfonos celulares son un particular "no-no" y el suyo debe irse, usted puede conseguir en más problemas de lo que sería para la carga de tráfico que se enfrentan. No es broma.)

El juez le ofrecemos algunas instrucciones, pero lo anterior es más o menos la esencia de la misma. Estas palabras de apertura son muy importantes para que tomen nota y se hacen para el registro en el caso de un acusado más adelante afirma que nunca fue informado de este derecho o ese derecho.





¿Qué digo cuando el juez llama a mi nombre?

En algún momento durante este proceso o bien el Secretario del Tribunal o el Juez puede "llamar a la lista." Aquí es donde la lista de nombres en el calendario se llama, por lo general en orden alfabético, y se le pregunta a responder. Esto puede ser uno de esos momentos de nerviosismo en el que no está seguro de qué decir, algunas personas incluso empezar a descolgarse a cabo su defensa, pero que debe limitarse a decir algo como "No Culpable su señoría. Me gustaría una oportunidad para discutir mi caso con el Fiscal. "El juez va a ser muy impresionado y luego pasar a la siguiente nombre en la lista. El hecho es que no se declara culpable sin embargo, a medida que todavía se enfrentan a la carga como por escrito. Es probable que se declaró culpable más tarde, siempre y cuando el fiscal modifica los cargos a otra cosa.



No quiero que de declararse negocio, quiero tener un juicio. Es la palabra del agente contra la mía. Estoy seguro que cuando el juez escucha mi versión de los hechos que se entienden y que ganarás.

Usted es inocente hasta que se demuestre lo contrario, esto es cierto. Aún así, normalmente no se necesita mucho de un esfuerzo de un fiscal con experiencia para dar ese salto de su inocencia a su culpabilidad. Si usted piensa que su creencia subjetiva de que usted no hizo nada malo va a influir en el juez es probable que esté equivocado. Mucha gente piensa que si el juez simplemente "escucha mi historia", que lanzará a su caso. El juez, sin embargo, no estaba en el lugar para ver que usted no hizo nada malo. Él tiene que confiar en el testimonio que se le presenta. Mayoría de las veces en un ensayo multa de tráfico que hay dos testigos, el acusado y el oficial. Ciertamente, "más allá de toda duda razonable" suena como una búsqueda muy elevado para un fiscal. Usted se preguntará si es sólo su palabra contra la del funcionario, ¿cómo va a ser encontrado culpable "más allá de toda duda razonable"? ¿Por qué el oficial hay que creer y que no creía ser? No se puede ser confundido con el oficial? No el oficial tiene algún interés en el resultado del caso? Lo que hace que su testimonio más creíble que la tuya?

Estas son todas preguntas legítimas. Por desgracia, no suele llevar el día. En términos prácticos, si los casos fueron desestimados en la Corte Municipal por estas razones, muy pocas personas alguna vez ser condenado. Es concebible que, en todos los casos en los que es el funcionario contra el acusado (que es casi todos los casos), el Tribunal puede decir a sí mismo, "Hmmm, tal vez el oficial de policía está mintiendo o equivocado" y lanza el billete de salida. Reflexiona que la noción de un minuto. Si eso fuera cierto, casi todos los casos pueden ser despedidos por estos motivos. Tal extremo lógico no podía ser tolerada. Nuestro sistema de justicia, por decirlo así, se convertiría en su cabeza. En cambio, los tribunales utilizan el razonamiento de que es probablemente correcta el 99% del tiempo. El oficial no tiene ningún interés personal. Él está capacitado y con experiencia y no tendría obligación de señalar un conductor inocente como tú lo largo de los conductores culpables numerosos en el camino que podría haber detenido en su lugar. No tiene nada que ganar con lo que el caso en su contra. Por el contrario, usted tiene todo que perder. Usted no tiene la formación, el velocímetro no se ha calibrado y cualquier testigo que pudiera haber traído está relacionado con usted o es su amigo y, obviamente, estar sesgados en su favor. Este es el razonamiento que da lugar a una declaración de culpabilidad en la gran mayoría de las cuestiones controvertidas de la Corte Municipal. No, no es un sistema perfecto, pero, en términos prácticos, es mejor que la alternativa de permitir que casi todo el mundo para vencer a sus entradas para lo que son probables motivos ilegítimos.



Quiero declararse culpable, pero quiero declararse culpable con una explicación. Había una buena razón he violado la ley. ¿Tiene esto alguna diferencia?

A menos que su "buena razón" es una defensa legal que no afectará el resultado. Siéntase libre de declararse culpable con una explicación, pero estamos hablando de semántica. Culpable es culpable, con o sin su explicación. El juez puede considerar su explicación con respecto a la sentencia como un factor atenuante, pero no va a tirar el boleto de salida si ese es su expectativa.



El funcionario mal mi nombre y / o que tiene el número equivocado en mi matrícula. ¿El boleto de ser expulsado?

Dudoso. Short of failing to sign the ticket, there is virtually nothing the officer can do wrong on the ticket that will invalidate it. While this tactic seems to work in other States (notably New York), New Jersey does not get overly concerned that a number or letter is off on your summons. If there is enough on the summons to advise a reasonable person where and what they did wrong, that will usually be enough. The Court on its own motion or the Prosecutor may simply amend the ticket to reflect the correct spelling or number.



A friend of mine told me that if the officer doesn't show up in Court, the ticket dismissed. ¿Es esto correcto?

Generalmente, no. This is another misconception because theoretically it should be true. In theory, if you appear and the Prosecution's witness (the officer) doesn't, there is no case to present and the case fails due to “Lack of Prosecution.” The problem is that the Court will not generally go so far as to throw out a case if this happens just once. You can ask the Judge to dismiss the matter and then the Prosecutor, who is aligned with the officer, will stand and offer just about any excuse as to why the officer did not appear. He may not even offer an excuse but he will do handstands if necessary to get an adjournment to ensure that the officer's appearance the next time. In New Jersey, unlike some other jurisdictions, an officer can be reprimanded if his case is dismissed due to lack of prosecution so, as stated, the Prosecutor goes to great lengths not to let that happen. The Judge is also aware of the officer's predicament so he may also have this in the back of his head. It is possible that the case can be adjourned even more than once for these reasons and consequently, you are forced to return over and over. By the time the officer does show up, he may be less than thrilled to meet you nor be very accommodating. So, while in theory, the case can be dismissed due to Lack of Prosecution, it is a rarity.



I received a speeding ticket from a cop and while I may have been speeding, there is no way I was traveling as fast as he wrote me for. He was a real jerk and when I asked to look at his radar unit to see the reading, he wouldn't let me. Is this justice?

It may not be justice but it is a fact of life. The officer is not obligated to entertain your discussions or show you his radar reading. He doesn't have to prove to you that you were speeding, he has to prove it to the Court. And, unfortunately, while it would sure be nice, there is no requirement that the officer be pleasant while issuing you a ticket. Motorists who ask this questions are probably already behind the eight ball. It's a good idea, even if you have to bite your tongue, to be cordial to the officer. Even if he is confrontational, you should remain calm and polite. If you plan on contesting the ticket and saving points, the Prosecutor, who was not on the scene, may defer to the Officer's judgment. If you had some choice words for the officer or otherwise gave him a hard time, he will likely remember you and may not be as eager to help you as he otherwise might.



The officer who stopped me asked me if I knew why he was pulling me over. I didn't want to admit any wrongdoing but at the same time I wanted to be cooperative. What should I have said?

This is a tough call. If you answer “yes, because I was driving 99 miles a hour” then your admission could come back to haunt you at you in a trial. Alternatively, if you say “Gee I have no idea, do I have a brake light out?” you run the risk of sounding less than candid and ticking off the cop. If the officer is considering letting you go, as is his prerogative, he would likely prefer honesty on your part. The answer lies somewhere in the middle. Answer in terms of what you may have done. In that manner you are not committed. “I may have been speeding” is short, it offers candor and it doesn't outright prove your guilt. Apologizing is effectively an admission of guilt so that should be avoided. Instead, use an apologetic tone.

By the way, do not be embarrassed to hand the officer that FOP card you have or to advise that your Uncle John is the Chief of police in a neighboring town. The officer will not be able to rip up your tickets if you bring these items to his attention after they've been written.





The officer stopped me for speeding but he was either A) coming from the opposite direction; B) measuring my speed from behind a tree, building, billboard, or other structure; C) in front of me; D) pacing me; or E) otherwise unable to get a good read on my speed. Will this defense work?

A) no; B) no; C) no; D) no; and E) no. I know that sounds negative. If you don't have an attorney and often even if you do, these defenses rarely get anywhere. Police officers have been issuing speeding tickets for a long time, long before you and I ever received our drivers licenses. All of these defenses have been litigated over and over. Through the years of jurisprudence and case law these defenses have generally gotten no where and about the only defense to a speeding ticket that has a legitimate chances is if there is something clearly wrong with the officers radar unit or if he doesn't have the requisite training. Unless you know how to read calibration tests and have some wherewithal when it comes to tuning forks, you will likely be shot down in your tracks. Come to think of it, even with knowledge in these areas you are probably sunk. There has even been case law concluding that the officer's subjective opinion that a car was speeding can be enough to prove a defendant guilty of an offense. Without belaboring the point, the gimmicks you may have come across online or the claims made by friends that the Prosecutor won't be able to produce the proper “Discovery” (proofs) are 95% unfounded, at least as far as they would to apply to New Jersey.



I received a ticket for going 90+ mph in a 65 mph zone and the officer gave me an additional ticket for careless/reckless driving. I don't understand the need for the second ticket. The judge can't take my license just for speeding can he?

He can and he often will at these speeds. A Municipal Court Judge does have the authority to suspend your driving privileges for a speeding summons and many do when your speed is excessive. “Excessive” is in the eye of the beholder but 90 mph in a 65 zone is a red flag and 100 mph in a 65 is practically a done deal. Depending on the circumstances and depending on your driving history, a Judge may suspend your driving privileges for 30, 60 or sometimes even 90 days or more. This is often a real reality check for unsuspecting defendants, particularly the motorist who has a payable ticket of 90 mph in a 65 mph zone and pleads not guilty hoping to catch a break in Court. Conceivably the motorist could have paid their ticket but by going to Court they get to meet the Judge, who may be less than accommodating, and then they have their licenses suspended. By and large, tickets of 90+ are not payable and you have no choice but to appear. There may be little you can do to avoid license suspension because many Judges simply draw the line at 90 mph or 100 mph and they do not budge from this position. Often, speeding tickets going double the speed limit or more are also susceptible to license suspension . Thus, 50+ in a 25 mph zone could be a real problem. You really should have representation under all such circumstances because having an attorney may be the difference between saving or losing your license. Whatever you do, when you go before the Judge and he inevitably asks you why you were driving so fast, do not attempt to offer any justification. Claiming you were going downhill, or you were lost, or you were moving with the traffic will not be well received. Unless you were bleeding to death or in a similar predicament, the best response is to say that you have no good excuse and it was a foolish course of action on your part. It would also be a good idea to have signed up for a defensive driving course (offered by AAA) and have the confirmation of the upcoming course in your hand to show the Judge or Prosecutor. The Court loves when a defendant has taken steps, on his/her own volition, to address what the Court will conclude is a problem he/she has. It is somewhat analogous to the alcoholic defendant who, when they appear in Court, has begun taking AA courses to treat the underlying reason for the offense they are facing.

As for the extra ticket of careless driving (2 points) or reckless driving (5 points) these are often thrown in for good measure because, presumably, you were either careless or reckless when you drove at this excessive speed. Usually, a Prosecutor will be willing to dismiss this additional ticket. (Important: See the difference between Dismissing and Merging tickets later in this tutorial)



I'm charged with DWI, Driving While Suspended, Driving Without Insurance, Leaving the Scene of an Accident or Drug charges. What do I do?

Please, please, pretty please hire an attorney. This tutorial is not designed to address these very serious charges or other similar offenses beyond common NJ moving violations.



I've heard about a “zero-point” ticket that costs more money. How does that work?

New Jersey has a statute, namely Unsafe Operation, NJSA 39:4-97.2, which carries zero points. This statute was designed with plea bargaining in mind and has terrific catch-all language such that nearly any moving violation (other than DWI) can be amended to it by a willing Prosecutor. Until July of 2004, this was a wonderful way to resolve a moving violation in New Jersey. Short of an outright dismissal, it was as good as it gets. This is still largely true, but in July of 2004 the NJ legislature, looking for ways to raise revenue without raising taxes, noted that we attorneys were getting this result for our clients entirely too often. They concluded that if they could collect money every time this statute comes to pass in a Municipal Court, the State could really cash in and address its deficit. ¿El resultado? A hefty $250.00 one time surcharge assessed by the Court. This charge is on top of your normal fines and costs. Whereas before July 2004 Unsafe Operation might cost a defendant $150.00 to $175.00, it now costs in the neighborhood of $400.00 for a first offense.

Given the sizeable fine amount, you might consider why you are in Court trying to get this result at all. As it happens, you are permitted two “Unsafe Operations”, assuming it is offered, before a third one would result in four points . While its nickname is the “zero-point” summons, it isn't zero points on the third or more occasion. A caveat to this is if your third occasion is beyond five years from the second , in which case you are given a clean slate and you can once again obtain zero points.

There are different schools of thought respecting whether to attempt to retrieve Unsafe Operation and under what circumstances. There is general agreement among attorneys that a ticket of three or more points is worth the trip to Court for a reduction to zero points . Some attorneys, however, think that you should attempt to retrieve Unsafe Operation no matter how few points you are facing. The theory is that it is simply a bad idea to accumulate any points if you can avoid it. This writer's belief is that it is not worth attempting to retrieve an Unsafe Operation if you are facing a simple two point ticket, unless, of course, you are already in point trouble. The most common two point tickets are speeding 1-14 mph over the speed limit, careless driving and running a red light. While circumstances vary, $400.00 is a fair sum of money to pay and there may or may not be a comparative increase in your auto insurance costs if you are assessed the points. Many insurance companies will even forgive your first two point summons so there will be no adverse consequence. It is advisable to contact your insurance agent and inquire as to whether two points will affect your insurance costs. If you are a careful driver, haven't had a ticket in years and are now facing a two point ticket, it might make sense to simply pay the fine. If the two points bother you, you might consider taking a Defensive Driver course, offered by AAA and other agencies, where a successful completion of the Course can result in a two point reduction once submitted to DMV. The course is affordable, often less than $100.00. In effect, you have received the two point reduction that would have cost $400.00 in Court for significantly less. It could well happen that a year from now, or even six weeks from now, you could get a 4 point ticket that you would better served to go to Court and attempt to retrieve one of the two Unsafe Operations you have available.

For these reasons, I generally do not recommend going to Court and attempting to amend two point tickets to Unsafe Operation unless you already have point trouble. In the end, each person has to do their own cost/benefit analysis and consider the various factors and reach their own decision.



Are there other zero-point tickets other than Unsafe Operation so I don't have to pay $400.00 or more?

Yes there are, but the Prosecutor does not readily hand them out. Prior to 1999 and the advent of 39:4-97.2, Unsafe Operation, we attorneys would appear in Court and attempt to persuade the Prosecutor to amend moving violations to 39:4-67, Obstruction Traffic, or 39:4-56, Delaying Traffic. These statutes are still on the books. Since they are effectively not moving violations, no points are associated with them. Prior to 1999 an attorney and his client would stand before the Judge and enter a factual basis that really had no basis in fact. Even though he/she committed an entirely different offense (eg. speeding), the defendant claims that he either obstructed or delayed traffic. If you think about it, it is impossible to speed, blow a red light or improperly pass and thereby obstruct or delay traffic. With the introduction of Unsafe Operation, there was no longer the need to put this fiction before the Court. Defense attorneys rejoiced until July, 2004 when the State stuck their hands in the till, extracting $250.00 from every Unsafe Operation. Attempting now to revert back to Obstructing Traffic or Delaying Traffic is met with tremendous resistance due to the very realistic fact that you neither obstructed traffic or delayed traffic and, moreover, Unsafe Operation better addresses your bad driving. Meanwhile, Municipal Court Judges have received directives from higher up not to accept pleas without proper factual bases and such attempts will rarely pass their judicial scrutiny. So, only in rare instances will you be able to get zero points which isn't Unsafe Operation, and hardly ever if you don't have an attorney.



When do I speak to the Prosecutor?

Depending on the Court, one of two ways. The first might be prior to the Judge taking the bench. The other would be after the Judge's opening remarks. In half of the Courts the Prosecutor will be sitting at his desk up close to the Judge's bench and he or she will entertain conferences with defendants. You should take this opportunity if it is available. In the other half of the Courts the Prosecutor has his own office in a nearby or adjoining room. You will find that there may be a line at his office that you should get in ASAP. Check the Court Room first and if he's not there, look for his office.



I can't wait to tell the Prosecutor what happened. Once he hears what I have to tell him, he'll certainly want to dismiss the case.

You might think that once you reach the Prosecutor this is your opportunity to tell your entire sad tale. Certainly, the Prosecutor, if he is going to understand who you are and get to know you and find out how you ended up in front of him, he will want to know your whole life story. He will want to know all the details as to how you got your ticket, where you were coming from, where you were going and how you were pulled over for really no good reason. This may come as a big surprise but , in general, the Prosecutor does not want to hear your version of the facts nor does he care about your life story. He doesn't have the time to engage you, and the facts of your case that he cares about are right there on your tickets. Being a Prosecutor, he assumes that you are guilty of the offense as charged. He is not interested in hearing what he will inevitably conclude are your bad defenses. He does not want to hear how you had to speed in order to get to work on time or that you had to speed in order to pass a slow moving vehicle or that you had to speed in order to get to a rest stop. He does not want to hear that you were “going with the flow of traffic” and /or it was impossible for the officer to have singled you out. He does not want to hear that your radar detector didn't go off or that the officer was rude to you. He will be unmoved by your argument that there was “no way” your four cylinder car could have reached the speed that the officer claimed. He doesn't care if it was a speed-trap or that you were going downhill. He doesn't want to see the schematics you've drawn of the scene or the pictures you have taken of the traffic light depicting that it was green at the time you passed through. If it appears that he is showing the slightest bit of interest in your claims he is merely being polite.

Why doesn't the Prosecutor want to hear any of this? The reason is that he has likely been at this job for a long time, has heard it all before and knows that your defense is probably not a defense. The fact that you were traveling along with the traffic is not a legal defense to speeding. The fact that your photograph depicts a green light doesn't prove that it was green when you went through it. It is not a defense that you drove on the shoulder in order to make your eventual turn. Believe it or not, you're not the first person who has approached the Prosecutor with the claim that you had a sick child in the back of your car who was about to throw up. There is really nothing you can offer the Prosecutor that he hasn't heard dozens, if not hundreds of times previously. There will usually be nothing novel about an unrepresented defendant's so-called “defense.” Having gone down this road too often, the Prosecutor has concluded that if he listens to you explain your life away, it does nothing to expedite the proceedings, which is his main objective.



Okay, if the Prosecutor won't want to listen to me, what is my approach?

In general, Prosecutors have a rule of thumb when it comes to point reductions for unrepresented defendants. If you are charged with a 5 point ticket, you will likely be offered 4 points, if you are charged with a 4 point ticket, you will be offered 2 points and if you are charged with a 2 point ticket you will be offered zero points and the hefty fines. Prosecutors may deviate from this general rule and you can benefit as a result.

How do you persuade him to do it? Your rule of thumb: be brief, be direct and be humble. Be pleasant and do not be confrontational. What the Prosecutor wants to hear from you is simple: how is your driving record and were you cooperative with the officer. Those are the two big concerns of any Prosecutor. As stated, he has assumed you're guilty so now his concern, if he is going to help you, are these mitigating factors. If you were, in fact, disruptive or rude to the officer, you could be done for, assuming the Prosecutor defers to the officer. It is at this point where you say how foolish you were. Acknowledge that the officer was correct to stop you, you were having a really bad day and if need be, you would like to apologize to the officer. Hopefully, you did not give the officer a hard time and don't have to stoop to this. It can be a bitter pill to swallow.

As for your driving record, if it is good then point that out immediately. A prosecutor can justify to the Court or the officer offering someone with a good driving record a good plea agreement. Don't say its good if it isn't because it is altogether possible that the Prosecutor has your driving history in his hand. While you maybe have gotten nowhere trying to obtain your driving history from DMV, your abstract is easily attainable in the Court and can be retrieved if necessary.

If your records isn't so good and you have point issues, you may have to come at the Prosecutor from another angle. If he doesn't bring it up, don't bring it to his attention. If it surfaces, here you might point out the obvious fact that you really can't afford to get more points on your license. (After all, a person in point trouble could use the help more than someone with a good driving record). Perhaps, previously you had gotten tickets and simply paid them because you were guilty. You didn't see the point in bothering the Court and fighting them (though you likely see the point now). Perhaps you had a bad streak and you've been doing a whole lot better lately. You have to work with what you got.

Another factor the Prosecutor considers is the egregiousness of your offense. The more egregious, the less willing he will be to help you. Egregiousness, like everything, is relative. Were you one of those obnoxious drivers driving on the shoulder to avoid traffic? Were you going 90+ mph and weaving in and out of cars? Or were you committing an offense that everyone does, a rolling stop through a stop sign or caught between the yellow and the red light? The latter scenarios are clearly less egregious than the former and will be greeted with a more receptive Prosecutor. In all likelihood, the Prosecutor can relate. He may even have driven in the same manner on his way to Court!

Notwithstanding the above, it is altogether possible that you can say and do all the right things and still not get the best outcome. Each Prosecutor and each Court have its own personality. The Prosecutor might not give you the time of day or the Judge might not permit certain plea agreements or the officer may be less than cooperative. There are too many variables to guarantee any absolute result.



Why would the Prosecutor be willing to downgrade my charge if he could easily convict me?

Considere lo siguiente. The fact is that there are scores of matters before the Court during your session. The Prosecutor, if he wanted, could prosecute every defendant in the Courtroom and he could likely convict 95% of those he tries. The defendant, particularly the unrepresented defendant, is at a significant disadvantage. Clearly though, if the Prosecutor were to prosecute the entire Courtroom, the Court session would go on for hours on end. No one wants this to happen. The Prosecutor, the Judge, the Court Staff all want to get home eventually, just like everyone else. Moreover, most Prosecutors are not terrible guys and they recognize that defendants in a Municipal Court, by in large, are not criminals. They were unlucky enough to have been pulled over and issued a summons or two and they have appeared in Court to do some damage control. They are hopeful that there can be a reduction in the number of points they are facing and thereby minimize the consequences they may face from DMV and their insurance company.

While the Judge may tell you in his opening remarks that the Court does not hand out points, which it doesn't (DMV does), he and the Prosecutor and everyone else knows that points are really the name of the game. There is of course the occasional defendant who insists he did nothing wrong and when push comes to shove the Prosecutor will give him a trial. But, given the time constraints, the calendar load and the recognition that you aren'ta criminal, the Prosecutor is often willing to make a plea agreement with a defendant to save everyone the aggravation.





What if I have more than one moving violation? What do I say to the Prosecutor then?

Sometimes you have the misfortune of having two or more movable violations with points coming at you in large quantities. In these cases it is advisable to get what could be called a “package deal” where you can perhaps plea to one of the tickets and dismiss the other ticket or tickets. You can even ask for the remaining ticket's points to be reduced. As an example, a four-point speeding ticket could be reduced to two points and the other two-point Careless Driving ticket could be dismissed. Rest assured you will likely not convince a Prosecutor to go from 7 points to zero or from 9 to 2 but there are some palatable combinations that can work. Some consolation in this situation, if there is any, is that there are fewer fines to pay since a ticket or tickets are being dismissed. If you are facing a two point ticket and a four point ticket, the Prosecutor may suggest you plead to the four point ticket and he'll dismiss the 2 pointer. Test the water and ask if you can plea to the 2 point ticket and dismiss the 4 pointer. Use the same strategy if you are facing two tickets with higher point quantities. For those of you facing three or more moving violations, not good, you really should have hired an attorney.

NOTE: This may be a good time to discuss the issue of “merger.” Until fairly recently, merging one ticket into another was the practical equivalent of dismissing the merged ticket. Not so anymore. This is a murky issue which came to light with respect to how court personnel were entering disposed tickets into the Automated Traffic System (ATS). Presently, if one ticket is merged into another, say for instance a careless driving ticket is merged into a speeding ticket, you don't pay fines for the merged ticket but you may still get the DMV points. This can be a very sticky situation. A Prosecutor may say “Okay, we'll merge the other tickets into your reckless driving ticket” and you feel great that all these other tickets went away. Then months later you receive a surcharge notification from DMV saying you've been assessed all the points for the merged summonses. So when dealing with the Prosecutor, you don't want your associated tickets “merged”, you want them dismissed.



What about these other tickets I received for no seatbelt or not having a document in my possession? What do I do about them?

While these tickets, such as 39:3-29, not having a certain document in your possession, or 39:3-76.2, seatbelt tickets, seem as though the officer was rubbing salt in your wounds, such tickets can often be used as leverage. There is no point consequence to nonmoving violations in New Jersey so a combination of pleas where you plea to such tickets in exchange for a greater reduction in points is altogether realistic. The Prosecutor may offer to dismiss the 39:3-29 or the seatbelt ticket but you can suggest that you would be willing to pay it in exchange for a greater reduction in points. If the Prosecutor doesn't bite, make sure you ask him to dismiss such summonses as they translate into money out of your pocket for no real good reason.





I've worked out my deal with the Prosecutor, what's next?

Thanks to your brief, direct and humble approach, you've worked out an agreement with the Prosecutor. Find a seat in the Courtroom close to the front or near the aisle and wait for your name to be called to appear before the Judge. At this point it is fairly random when you will be called and whether your name begins with A or Z is of no consequence. When you hear your name called, approach either the defense table (that's the second table up front where the Prosecutor is not sitting) or the microphone that may be in the middle between the Prosecution and Defense tables. The Judge will look at you and say something very judicious such as “Are you so-and-so (insert your name)?” Either he or the Prosecutor will then go over the plea agreement you have reached.

Most Judges will then go into a brief colloquy with you. He may ask if you entered this plea bargain voluntarily. Did anyone force you to enter this plea arrangement. Are you aware that by entering a guilty plea you are giving up your right to trial and your right to cross-examine the State's witnesses? Knowing that are you still willing to plea guilty? Next is the “kicker.” The Judge will ask if you are acknowledging that on such-and-such date in the town of such-and-such you drove in the manner to which you are pleading guilty. This can make some people feel a little uneasy. You are being asked to admit you did something wrong and maybe you aren't so convinced. Nonetheless, you're faced with this yes or no question. For the Court to accept your plea it has to hear from your lips an admission of wrongdoing. It is called “entering a factual basis .” If you say either “No” or “No, but I figure I better say I'm guilty to get the benefit of a plea bargain” or anything that sounds remotely like you're not sure you want to go through with this, the Judge slams on the brakes and says, “Oh well, I guess we're going to have a trial, sit back down.” If you didn't do anything wrong and want to have a trial, by all means, say “No”, or alternatively, don't bother discussing your matter with the Prosecutor in the first place. However, if you want to get out of Court and to the payment window in the next three minutes you will acknowledge that “yes” you made an error in driving. Once said, it is smooth sailing and the Judge assesses fines and costs and sends you on your way. Note: Some Judges surprisingly skip the whole “factual basis” exercise and save you any trepidation.





I'm done. Do I have to pay my fine now? What if I didn't bring any money?

Go to the window where you first checked in many hours earlier and provide your name so you can make payment. Whatever you do, do not go to Court without any funds. The Court expects, and the Judge may address it in his opening remarks, that you have come with money in your pockets prepared to pay the fines. Most Courts do not want to become your creditor. The Courts have drawers full of time payment arrangements and they don't want to add you to the list. If funds are an issue, bring at least $100.00 with you for payment as a good faith effort and explain that you are simply unable to make the payment at this time. Very few Courts will let you leave without paying anything. Once again, being humble is a good idea. The Court does not have to accept a time payment arrangement, they do it entirely as an accommodation and they can even put you in jail, should they choose, if you can't make full payment. You might have to break out that cell phone you turned off earlier to call a friend or spouse for funds. If you can, offer to pay the balance of what you owe quickly. Extending payments too far is not met with receptiveness. As far as payment goes, all Courts accept cash or checks and about half will accept credit cards . Lastly, if you enter a payment arrangement, make sure you pay the Court as agreed and if you can't, call them and advise as such. They will hopefully extend you additional time. If you ignore your obligation, the Court can and will issue a warrant for your arrest and/or suspend your driving privileges.



Are there some Courts that are harder to deal with than others? Does it make a difference from county to county?

Sí. While most Municipal Courts function very similarly, there are Courts/Prosecutors/Judges that are simply less amenable to plea bargaining than others. Just like every person has a different personality, so too does each Court. It would be an exhaustive exercise to rank or critique each individual Court and even if attempted, Judges and Prosecutors can come and go which would change the landscape altogether. I will say, however, that I have appeared in Municipal Courts in every County of New Jersey and for whatever reason, the northwest part of the State (Warren County) can be very unforgiving. Maybe it's the colder weather?



I really didn't commit an offense. Do I have to enter a plea agreement?

No. If you didn't commit any offense you obviously have the option to go to trial. The Prosecutor will have to prove your guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. It is possible, though not guaranteed, that justice will prevail. Given the layperson's unfamiliarity with the law, it is advisable to retain an attorney if you desire to take your matter to trial.



Would having an attorney have moved the process any faster?

¡Sí! Court Rules require, and the Judge will tell you during his opening remarks, that matters with attorneys take precedence over matters without attorneys. If there weren't enough reasons not to like attorneys this is yet another that can be added to the list. The lawyers get to cut in front of you to speak to the Prosecutor and after that, the Judge moves the lawyers' cases post haste. Ever since preschool you've been told that its wrong to cut in line, but an attorney in Municipal Court is allowed to do it, does it quite brazenly, and astonishingly, you are told that those are in fact the rules! If you are one of those people who end up waiting 4 or 5 hours for your case to be heard you will wonder why you didn't hire an attorney who got in and out of Court in an hour. These Court rules exist to accommodate the fact that lawyers have to often be in more than one Court at a time. The rules seem to give little weight to the fact that the unrepresented defendant has places he or she might like to be as well. Where you have to be is apparently not as important as where I have to be. Sorry, those are the rules.



Why else hire an Attorney?

Since this tutorial tells you everything you need to know about Municipal Court (that's sarcasm) you may wonder why would you need an attorney. An attorney is schooled, trained and experienced. He is familiar with the rules of evidence, knows what defenses do and don't work and often has familiarity with the players involved in your Municipal Court hearing. You yourself represent very little opposition to an experienced Prosecutor. If you don't like the deal he proposes or if he doesn't propose a deal you have little leverage or ability to counter this fact. Conversely, an attorney represents a genuine obstacle. He can make appropriate motions and knows the appropriate means, if any, to combat the proofs presented. Even if you defense might not succeed, the threat of a defense will often cause a Prosecutor to offer a better plea bargain. It is simply a matter of fact that a represented defendant will generally receive a better plea offer than the unrepresented one.

Beyond the above, an attorney provides a certain comfort level you otherwise don't have. He knows where to go, who to speak to, where to sit, where to stand, what to say and, as indicated earlier, he gets preference over the other matters without attorneys.



Hopefully you will find the above useful. Again, I do not recommend going to Court alone . If you have a NJ Speeding Ticket or other New Jersey Traffic Ticket please visit our website www.njpleabargain.com. We will be happy to offer any assistance we can.



www.njpleabargain.com







DISCLAIMER: THIS TUTORIAL IS NOT INTENDED TO BE A SUBSTITUTE FOR AN IN-DEPTH CONSULTATION WITH AN ATTORNEY. IT DOES NOT PROVIDE CASE LAW OR EXPLAIN RULES OF EVIDENCE OR OTHERWISE PREPARE A DEFENDANT FOR TRIAL. THESE MATERIALS ARE DESIGNED TO ASSIST A DEFENDANT IN UNDERSTANDING THE NEW JERSEY MUNICIPAL COURT PROCESS AND TO PROVIDE PRACTICAL SUGGESTIONS RESPECTING COURT APPEARANCE AND PLEA NEGOTIATION, NOTHING MORE. THERE IS NO GUARANTEE, WRITTEN OR IMPLIED THAT BY FOLLOWING THESE GUIDELINES YOU WILL ACHIEVE YOUR DESIRED RESULT. THE TUTORIAL ADDRESSES TYPICAL NEW JERSEY MOVING VIOLATIONS CARRYING NJ DMV POINTS AND IS NOT DESIGNED TO ADDRESS MORE SERIOUS DRIVING OFFENSES SUCH AS DWI, DRIVING WHILE SUSPENDED, LEAVING THE SCENE OF AN ACCIDENT OR DRUG OFFENSES. THESE AND OTHER SUCH OFFENSES MAY HAVE MORE SERIOUS CONSEQUENCES AND SHOULD BE DISCUSSED IN FULL WITH AN ATTORNEY.









Alquiler de Fast Back