Form 75: Request for Speeding Discovery

• Library: Criminal Law Forms (ABA) (2013 Ed.)

Form 75: Request for Speeding Discovery

KENNETH VERCAMMEN & ASSOCIATES, PCATTORNEY AT LAW2053 Woodbridge Ave.Edison, NJ 08817(Phone) 732-572-0500(Fax) 732-572-0030

website: www.njlaws.com

D

PROSECUTOR
MUNICIPAL COURT

Court Administrator
MUNICIPAL COURT

RE: State v
D/O
Summons:
Offense:
Request for speeding Discovery
& Letter of Representation

Dear Prosecutor and Court Administrator:

My client has been charged with a speeding violation. Kindly enter my appearance for said defendant and a plea of "NOT GUILTY". Under Rule 7:6-1b my client waives arraignment and certifies we have received a copy of the complaint, have read it and understand the substance of the charge.

We would be agreeable to entering a guilty plea to 39:4-97.2 or 39:4-56. I look forward to speaking to the Prosecutor on the day of Court. In the event this cannot be resolved with a no point violation, we request discovery. In order that there be no misunderstanding, in addition to the usual police reports, under State v Green417 NJ Super. 190 (App. Div. 2010)

In State v Green417 NJ Super. 190 (App. Div. 2010) the court decided that a motorist who has been charged with speeding is entitled to discovery respecting

(1) the speed-measuring device's make, model, and description;

(2) the history of the officer's training on that speed-measuring device, where he was trained, and who trained him;

(3) the training manuals for the speed-measuring device and its operating manuals;

(4) the State's training manuals and operating manuals for the speed-measuring device;

(5) the officer's logbook of tickets written on the day of defendant's alleged violation;

(6) the repair history of the speed-measuring device used to determine defendant's speed for the past twelve months; and

(7) any engineering and speed studies used to set the speed limit at the section of highway where defendant's speed was measured.

The court also found that the Stalker Lidar speed-measuring device had not been proven to be scientifically reliable and, as such, the results of its operation should not have been admitted during the municipal court proceedings or considered by the Law Division. The court remanded the matter to the Law Division for a plenary hearing on the scientific reliability of the Stalker Lidar. If it is determined to be reliable, then the matter is remanded to the municipal court for trial after the State has provided all of the discovery required by this opinion.

Therefore, we also request that the following be provided in discovery:

8. We request copies of any reported or unreported cases that indicate the machine used in this case has been found to be scientifically reliable.

9. All relevant written or recorded statements, or signed or unsigned confessions, written summaries of oral statements of confessions made by the defendant;

10. All books, papers, documents, photographs, sound or video recordings, tangible objects, buildings, or places, which are intended for use by the state as evidence at the trial

11. Copies of all correspondence received from the manufacturer of the SPEED MEASURING DEVICE;

12. All certificates of calibration for the SPEED MEASURING DEVICE unit used;

13. All certificates of calibration for the any tuning forks used;

14. Speedometer certifications for the vehicle used which the state intends to rely upon at trial;

15. All correspondence and documents received from the Division of Weights and Measures regarding the SPEED MEASURING DEVICE unit and/or tuning forks used;

16. The names and addresses of all individuals whom the arresting officer wrote tickets for in the period of...