Does NH recognize the right to a speedy trial for traffic violations?

[Sutherland]

A friend of mine finally received a court date for a traffic ticket from back in February. The court date is well beyond 6 months past the date the ticket is written for. I believe that this may violate his right to a speedy trial so it would make sense to file a motion to dismiss the case on those grounds. I found reference to 6 and 9 months being the limits for misdemeanors and felonies but, I have not yet found a limit for violations. Anyone know if there is one? Even if there is a limit it would appear he also has to show grounds for dismissal as well.


"Where the defendant is not incarcerated, every misdemeanor case pending without disposition after 6 months from date of entry and every felony case pending without disposition after 9 months from date of an indictment shall be scheduled forthwith for a show cause hearing as to whether, under the principles of Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514, 92 S.Ct. 2182. 33 L.Ed.2d 101 (1972), the case should be dismissed for lack of a speedy trial. "

source
http://www.courts.state.nh.us/rules/sror/sror-x.htm

Thanks,
Jason

[Russell Kanning]

I think NH would recognize a speedy trial if it saw it on the street, but I don't think it believes you have a right to one.

I don't know how well your attempts to change its mind will work.

[Free libertarian]

 It might make sense to define "speedy" first.  As in what is past precedence, their cases etc.

  Remember the State has the finest wordsmiths in their employ and they enjoy the benefit of
  making the rules and defining the meaning of words.  These all contribute to your "fair trial"   

[littlehawk]

they are backed up because so many people are deciding not to plea bargain and pay the fine.

You will NOT get a fair trial...nothing even close to it. If you lose you will most likely pay the same amount of money but be tacked on higher points which go on your driving record.

The deck is stacked against you. I tried fighting two tickets. lost both and almost got thrown in jail for contempt of court. It was a wakeup call for me to witness just how corrupt the judicial system is.

Everytime i tried to bring up the Constitiution and individual rights the judge threatened me with contempt. He exact words were this "This my my court, my rules." I told him  it was not his court, it is The Peoples court and further told him he was incorrect and reminded him that he took an oath to uphold the Constitution. I was very close to getting caged up. The judge was pissed, I lost the case, had to pay fines and I got an extra 2 points tacked on my record for taking it to trial.

The only positive thing I did was clog up the system and made them work for stealing my money.

The "speedy trial' argument is a hard one to get off on. I tried that as well. They told me due to budget cuts and more people contesting the tickets that they are backed-up.  Therefore I am getting the fastest date as they can set. Unless there is a specific tine/date set in writing for your stat you are SOL.

It is a kangaroo court fighting traffic tickets. I could not get a trial by jury of my peers... only a judge trial. The judge took the cops testimonies as ALL fact and questioned or ignored every one of my statements, asking for evidence, research etc to back my claims.  The judge continually let the cop speak out about things that were irrelevent in my case even though I objected several times. I did quite a bit of research and thought I was prepared for court but I quickly found out that the thugs do not even play by their rules... they just do whatever they please...and like the judge said, "This is my court, my rules."

[Sutherland]

Oh I'm under no impression that traffic courts are, in any way, fair. I've already learned that through personal experience. My friend is the one with the traffic charge though. He's not a complete statist but he does still believe that the system is fair and he believes that he will get a fair trial. His wishes are to try to fight it in court. Its his time and money to lose. However, this is a teachable moment depending on the outcome.

I see the potential for three outcomes of his case
1. The case is dismissed, he "wins" by not having to pay the state any money.
2. He has a strong defense, loses, and then gets the firsthand experience on how the courts are not fair.
3. He has a weak defense, loses, then blames himself for having a weak defense and learns nothing.

If I help him with his defense, the help I offer him needs to be completely in parallel with his wishes otherwise my help would not be honest help. As his friend, and to be honest to myself and him, I'm try to help him get the charge dismissed. Helping him build a stronger defense is parallel to his wishes and also increases the likelihood of outcome 2 over outcome 3. The worse outcome, of course, is for him to loses his time and money and not even learn anything from it.

The more I look into, the right to a speedy trial don't really seem to exist anymore. The referenced court case, Barker vs. Wingo (1972), basically says the court can deny the right to a speedy trial on a case-by-case basis. He might potential have grounds to dispute it because for a while the Hooksett police said they were sending him a citation but never got around to sending it until after he called about it a few times. He had also repeatedly called the police, prosecutor and court to see if he had a scheduled trial. He's been trying to get his day in court to be over and done with it and not have to worry about relying on the post office to notify him of a trial date and/or his license/registration being suspended. He can make a motion to dismiss based on those grounds even if the likely outcomes is that the court will reject it. Its not automatic that they will though.

[Tom Sawyer]

I think it is good to help your friend attempt to find justice...

[Russell Kanning]

The deck is stacked against you. I tried fighting two tickets. lost both and almost got thrown in jail for contempt of court. It was a wakeup call for me to witness just how corrupt the judicial system is.

Everytime i tried to bring up the Constitiution and individual rights the judge threatened me with contempt. He exact words were this "This my my court, my rules." I told him  it was not his court, it is The Peoples court and further told him he was incorrect and reminded him that he took an oath to uphold the Constitution. I was very close to getting caged up. The judge was pissed, I lost the case, had to pay fines and I got an extra 2 points tacked on my record for taking it to trial.

The only positive thing I did was clog up the system and made them work for stealing my money.

it seems worth it to go to the rotten courts a couple of times to experience the reality
it is their court .... they will throw a mere taxpayer out of it
the judge decides
your only power is withdrawing your consent as the victim

[WithoutAPaddle]

Realistically, the only ways to have a chance at succeeding at arguing that you have been denied your constitutuional right to a speedy trial are either,

1) Engage a prominent attorney.  A trial court judge isn't going to set precedent for a nobody, but sometimes, motions proffered by "esteemed" counsel are looked at more favorably by a trial judge than are the same motions from pro se defendants.  Unfortunately, there is no guarantee that you will win, and esteemed counsel usually costs about five grand, or,

2) You can appeal the trial court finding to the State Supreme Court.  The Supreme Court is more attuned to considering constitutional issues.  The filing fee is probably a few hundred dollars, and you can do that pro se.

I don't keep abreast of the frequent procedural changes that the New Hampshire Court system goes through, but I'm pretty sure that hearing an appeal of a traffic case would be a discretionary appeal.  At one time, the clerk could decide that some discretionary appeals were declined, but I think now, the declination Orders require the signature of at least one Justice, but again, I am not an expert on this matter.  If you do file a Supreme Court Appeal, you should send notices of it to every local newspaper to try to get it some publicity, just to make it more embarassing to the Court to decline to hear it.

[littlehawk]

Often, appealing to higher courts also involve very high fees. I wanted to appeal my summons but it was 245 dollars to file. And I would also have to pay for all transcripts and records of my case. Not to mention attorney fees, who IMO almost all of them do not even want to fight for constitutional or individual rights. They were schooled down a different path. Unless they have a burning passion for REAL JUSTICE they just play the game they were taught and enjoy big incomes and high society status. Thieves in suitcoats selling their soul for a buck.

I wish your friend good luck. More people need to take a few hits just to clog up the treasonic process.

I have a court case coming up next month involving charges of obstruction of an officers investigation and harrasment . I had a short discussion with a "metermaid" and told her how she is ruining innocent peoples lives. She called the thugs on me and I got thrown in a cage for awhile. They were quite aggressive since I "tried" to plead the fifth. They shived me around, pointed a taser at me, confiscated my dog, cuffed me hard enough to cause cuts in my wrists and shoved me hard into their SUV.

I am not sure how I will handle it. I will weigh my options after speaking to the jackass judge.