Click on the images for a larger view.
Click on the images for a larger view.
The California Penal Code provides a specific procedure for handling discovery in criminal cases, laid out in Section 1054. A speeding ticket, even though it is in most cases an "infraction," the lowest type of criminal violation, is still a "criminal" case - don't forget that! Instead of opening with a court order for discovery, you are supposed to make an informal request of the opposing council who is supposed to cooperate with your request without the need for a court order. If everything works the way it's supposed to, time is saved, court costs are reduced, and everyone is happy.
One thing that I now realize I should have done differently is specifically stated in my letter that I was entering a plea of "not guilty." Entering a plea starts certain statutory clocks counting down, clocks which are not started until a plea is entered. I couldn't argue that my right to a speedy trial had been denied after months of legal wrangling, because I hadn't actually formally entered a plea until a few months into the case.
As you can see, I originally addressed the letter to the District Attorney at the address indicated on the top part of the back of the citation, and it was received at that office by "H. Dinh," as shown above on the return receipt. The note I jotted on the letter came later at the first motion hearing, when I was informed that the address on the back of the citation is the address of the court, not the DA's office. "We are part of the same organization, aren't we?" joked Commissioner Heath at my motion hearing. You wouldn't know it at first glance, certainly.
Based on Section 1054.5(b), they had 15 days to reply to this informal request, after which I would be entitled to request a court order for discovery. Based on their reply to my request, they appeared to have missed the point entirely, and they would likewise miss the deadline.
