Criminal Law Newsletter
| Publication year | 1981 |
| Pages | 2552 |
| Citation | Vol. 10 No. 10 Pg. 2552 |
1981, October, Pg. 2552. Criminal Law Newsletter
Speeding charges are not easy to defend, and are even harder if not defended very often. They are difficult to defend because they are strict liability offenses; i.e., all that is required for conviction is proof of excessive speed---a culpable mental state is not required.(fn1) Also, these cases usually involve the use of radar in evidence, which is expensive to resist effectively.(fn2)
Traffic courts are as overburdened as the rest of the judicial system. Most judges agree that sensible use of judicial time is central to the effective administration of justice. Therefore, it should be expected that most traffic court judges will resist lengthy trials of speeding cases. Of course, judges can be expected to allow enough time to present a case properly, but they also will insist that counsel organize the defense well and use trial time purposefully.
There are a number of ways this can be accomplished. As a county judge who has presided over numerous trials of speeding cases, the author makes the following suggestions.
Bench trials take less time than jury trials, so counsel should decide in each case if a jury is desired and, if so, counsel must request one and comply with the requirements of Crim.P. Rule 23(a)(3).
As a general rule, legal arguments are more effective with judges, while reasonable doubt arguments seem to work better with juries. For example, from a purely theoretical standpoint, a jury really is not necessary if the defense is based on a claim of improper venue, assuming of course, everyone agrees on where the alleged offense occurred. On the other hand, if you are going to engage the citing officer in a swearing contest, i.e., if your client's testimony is diametrically opposed to the officer's, then you had better use a jury.
Of course, old hands at criminal defense believe that tactics are central to a good defense. They will tell you to hassle the prosecutor until he or she will settle with you along mutually acceptable lines. In this regard, old hands say you should always demand a jury trial and, thereby, bring as much pressure to bear on presumably overburdened prosecutors as possible. The problem is that trial courts are affected by these tactics and they are becoming increasingly unwilling to participate. Trial judges also have certain powers which they can utilize to expedite trials. For example, the Rules of Criminal Procedure permit limitation or termination of voir dire examination of prospective jurors:
If, in the opinion of the Court, the examination by the parties or by counsel is unduly repetitious, irrelevant, unreasonably lengthy, abusive. or otherwise improper, the court shall limit or terminate such...
To continue reading
Request your trial