Traffic Tickets and Prehearing Conferences: What Happens at a Prehearing Conference
When drivers receive civil infraction tickets in the State of Washington, drivers have three choices: 1. Pay the fine (you're admitting that you committed the infraction) 2. Request a mitigation hearing (you also pay the fine and admit to the infraction, but a kind judge might lower the fine, provided that's allowed for the type of infraction for which you were cited); 3. Fight (contest) the ticket. Many drivers, especially those who get a Seattle ticket, think that requesting a contested hearing will get them a contested hearing. Unfortunately, in a number of locations around the state (most notably Seattle), that's not exactly true. For those drivers who smartly fight their tickets, Seattle first schedules a prehearing conference. State law allows local courts to decide whether they want to hold prehearing conferences. What this means for drivers is an extra step and often a waste of time. A prehearing conference is the civil equivalent of a pretrial conference in criminal law. At the prehearing conference, drivers appear in front of a magistrate in an office. The magistrate will attempt to get the driver to essentially mitigate the infraction, thereby saving court resources and obtaining revenue for the city, county, and/or state. Occasionally, a magistrate at a prehearing conference will dismiss an infraction, but this is very rare and drivers should not expect this. What drivers should expect is that if they go to the prehearing conference, they will have to wait and NOT be able to have a contested hearing on that same day. The magistrate knows that you won't be able to have a contested hearing that day, but he/she doesn't tell you until the end of the prehearing conference that you will have to come back to court on another day for a contested hearing if you'd rather fight your ticket than "take the deal." Prehearing conferences are mostly a scam. Most drivers are unaware that when they request a contested hearing and want their day in court, they might instead get a prehearing conference, they won't be able to fight their tickets on the same day as the prehearing conference, and the driver who wants to fight has to return to court, often taking time off work. Luckily, you can save yourself the hassle of prehearing conferences by waiving them in advance of the hearing, or hiring an attorney experienced in fighting traffic tickets. If you have been issued a speeding ticket or you have been cited for another type of traffic offense, don't panic - just give me a call.
UPDATE: OCTOBER 13, 2011 - I have updated this post here.
I have an expectation based on years of advanced notification by mail, of the DMV sending me a license tab renewal notice. I did not receive one this year and drove, unknowingly, for 3 months before getting a $216 ticket. Isn't there some precedent that can be used based on this reasonable expectation that I can use to waive this ticket?
Ron,
Your expectation may or may not be reasonable to a court in terms of what the law says is reasonable, but WA law requires you to renew your tabs every year. Unfortunately, few people - and few judges in my opinion - really care whether or not DOL sent you a renewal notice, as most judges will say it's your responsibility to take care of the renewal, and judges have been known to say that you have actual notice of the expiration, because it's staring at you when you look at your rear license plate.
You can still contest the ticket and many judges will at the very least lower the bail amount (the fine), or you request the same at a mitigation hearing. This is not a ticket that will affect your insurance costs, but unfortunately it's a nuisance that we just have to live with.
very interesting.
i'm adding in RSS Reader
Your description of the prehearing conference SCAM is exactly what happened to me. I clearly stated on the traffic ticket that I was contesting the alleged offense but the City of Seattle still scheduled a hearing anyway.
At the hearing, I stated that I denied committing the infraction and explained why. The Magistrate never explained to me that if I still contested the hearing that I still had a right to go to trial and basically said, "Well, I can find you guilty or I can offer you this deal of a deferred prosecution." Of course, I foolishly took the latter as I was tired of waiting and didn't know any better.
But in the meantime, I have written to the court asking them to set aside the decision and my agreement to it since my due process rights were violated as I clearly stated that I wanted to contest it and the Court was without jurisdiction to hear it since I was contesting it and the Court (I don't think they earned a capital C) didn't appraise me of ALL of my rights in this matter.
Next time, I am going to hire an attorney and fight it tooth and nail. I am sick and tired of the city screwing us by not listening and respecting that people have lives and work and we can't take off twice to contest a nuisance ticket. If they were serious, they would schedule hearings in the evenings and allow us to do both the prehearing and the "trial" at the same time (although I don't know we could do discovery in that situation.)
We don't have prehearing conferences for small claims courts or other more serious traffic offenses. Why regular traffic tickets?
Keith,
Thank you for your excellent comment. I think it is fantastic that you've asked the court to set aside your agreement.
One of the many problems with prehearing conferences in Seattle Muni and the few other courts who utilize this option is that drivers who receive a ticket and request a contested hearing do not know that a second hearing request must be tendered until the notice of prehearing conference has been received or until the driver attends the conference. Although a prehearing conference waiver form is usually enclosed with or on the prehearing conference notice, the form itself does not cure the other problems with the procedures adopted by Seattle and other jurisdictions. To date, I do not know of any serious challenge to these procedures.
I believe prehearing conferences are held for judicial economy. Although small claims calendars do not have prehearing conferences, small claims calendars often do have mediators on hand, which is another way of diverting cases from an actual hearing. More serious traffic offenses actually do utilize something similar to a prehearing conference, the more serious version being a pretrial conference. But the procedures are quite different.