article: 07 Feb 06
While you may find this posting a little dry and heavy on legal technicalities, it documents the sorry state of our legal system. Just how screwed up is the legal system in this country? I'm not sure about the rest of the country, but I hope it's better than California.
As you may have noticed if you have looked at my other web sites (links on left), I run a site with a tutorial on fighting traffic tickets. I also do occasional paralegal work on traffic cases, usually helping write appeals. Tomorrow afternoon I'll be at the law library doing research for an appeal. This one involves preparing a petition for certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court on a parking ticket case. Yes, you read that right, the judicial system in California is sooo bad that we have to take a parking ticket to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Paul Bezaire, runs a site with a tutorial on fighting parking tickets. This is about his ticket; actually at this point it's about his right to due process.
Because of the similarities in our sites we have become friends over the past few years, so I was interested when Paul told me that he was going to fight a parking ticket on the grounds that the parking ticket fines in Los Angeles County are not standardized as required by law (Vehicle Code section 40203.5).
Parking tickets in California are civil, not criminal cases. Therefore, you do not fight one by simply going to court and pleading not guilty. You have to start by writing a letter to the issuing agency explaining why they should not enforce the ticket. If (When) the issuing agency informs you that they have reviewed your letter and will enforce the ticket, you may request a hearing by an administrative review board. If (When) the review board upholds the decision of the issuing agency, you may appeal by posting a $25.00 fee and having a hearing de novo in superior court.
Paul went through all of this and lost at every stage. He actually hoped to lose at every stage up to this point because the case would not establish a precedent if he did not go to at least the Appellate Division of the Superior Court. This, however, is where things got "interesting".
The Appellate Division informed Paul that they would not hear his case because the law did not provide for such an appeal. They cited two cases (Lagos v City of Oakland (1995) and Smith v City of Los Angeles Department of Transportation (1997)) in support of their position. Paul called me and asked what he should do? I had him send me the cites so I could research the cases.
[We need to digress for a brief lesson in the history of the California judicial system:
Prior to 2000 California had municipal as well as superior courts. The legislature had created the municipal courts to handle infractions and misdemeanors. Since the muni courts were a creation of the legislature, not the Constitution, they only had the authority provided for by the legislature and no more.]
Lagos and Smith both pointed out that, "No express provision is made for further appeal to the appellate department." Which was true in 1995 and 1997, when the two cases went to municipal courts on appeal from their administrative review board hearings. However, by 2005 when Paul got his ticket two important points had changed.
- As you may have noticed, in the previous paragraph I said that California had municipal courts prior to 2000. Paul had his appeal from the board heard in superior court, which (since it is created by the Constitution) needs no provision by the legislature for appeal to the appellate department.
- Ignoring the entire muni/superior court issue, we still have to look at another point. In 1998 the legislature (in an obvious response to Lagos and Smith) amended Vehicle Code section 40230(a) to include the sentence, "A proceeding under this case is a limited civil hearing." They also added "An appeal in a limited civil case is to the appellate division of the superior court," to section 904.2 of the Code of Civil Procedure. This absolutely overcame the problem raised in both Lagos and Smith by providing for appeal to the appellate department of the superior court.
I helped Paul draft a letter to the LA Superior Court Appellate Division explaining this. They responded by ignoring the changes in the status of the court (i.e., muni to superior), and the changes in the law, simply citing Lagos and Smith again and refusing to hear the appeal.
At that point I helped Paul prepare an appeal of the Superior court's ruling and he submitted it to Court of Appeal. They also responded by ignoring the changes in the status of the court (i.e., muni to superior), and the changes in the law, simply citing Lagos and Smith and refusing to hear the appeal.
Paul had two choices, give up or go to the California Supreme Court. If you have read Paul's web site, it should not surprise you to find out that he asked me to help prepare a Petition for Review to the California Supreme Court. In September 2005 the court declined to hear the case.
Having made it this far, you realize that Paul has yet to have the real hearing on the merits of his main argument (i.e., do the cities in LA County have to abide by the law and standardize their parking penalties?). This is because the courts refuse to even recognize, much less abide by the law (Code of Civil Procedure section 904.2 and Vehicle Code section 40230(a)).
After discussing the case with attorneys, including one of the best appellate law firms in the state, Paul and I have concluded that (like President Bush) the county and the courts are not above the law. Which means I get to go to the law library tomorrow and research filing a petition for certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court - over a parking ticket. Our legal system is that screwed up.
