Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [tips_and_tricks]Docket Sheet

Expand Messages
  • seafish
    I noticed on copy of the Infraction Notice that my son gave me that the City of Seattle (Washington) gave him had WASHINGTON UNIFORM COURT DOCKET - DEFENDANT
    Message 1 of 4 , May 2 9:32 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      I noticed on copy of the Infraction Notice that my son gave me that the
      City of Seattle (Washington) gave him had "WASHINGTON UNIFORM
      COURT DOCKET - DEFENDANT COPY" at the bottom.  I know this
      document is not a complaint nor is it a summons, because it is missing
      the required elements of either a complaint or of a summons as required
      under the court rules. 

      In Washington, RCW 4.28.020 shows how a court acquires jurisdiction:

      "From the time of commencement of the action by service of summons, or
      by the filing of a complaint
      , or as otherwise provided, the court is deemed to
      have acquired jurisdiction and to have control of all subsequent proceedings"
      [1984 c 76 § 2; 1895 c 86 § 4l 1893 c 127 § 15; RRS § 238.]

      Didn't know that kidnapping was a valid method for the court to acquire jurisdiction.
      Maybe that fits under "as otherwise provided" category.

      I am reading the codes and regulations as to how a "uniform court docket" creates
      an action that fits into the "as otherwise provided" category. 

      Can you give me a hint on what to look for?
      SeaFish

      Frog Farmer wrote:



      > You are choosing to do all their work for them,
      > > by being in such a damned hurry. How can you say you are willing to
      > > take it all back to arraignment, and in the same breath say you were
      > > "charged"? <<<<NOT clear on all that >>>>>

      No kidding! You are not "charged" until there are "charges" meaning
      either a complaint (this word has a meaning) or whatever you PERMIT to
      be "used as a complaint" (in your case, a docket sheet?)



    • Frog Farmer
      ... Infractions are usually a waiver of due process rights necessary to convict on less than a felony. In return for expedience and convenience, rights are
      Message 2 of 4 , May 3 12:44 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        seafish [mailto:1seafish@...] wrote:

        > I noticed on copy of the Infraction Notice that my son gave me that

        "Infractions" are usually a waiver of due process rights necessary to
        convict on less than a felony. In return for expedience and
        convenience, rights are waived by the defendant, usually starting with
        the defendant helping and cooperating in the preparation of an
        "accusatory pleading" "less than a complaint" paperwork that will be
        used "in lieu of a complaint". Consent is evident to witnesses, usually
        by a signature of the person waiving the rights to a real criminal
        prosecution with all due process elements. The alternative is for the
        person who wants their rights to demand them by demanding to immediately
        see a magistrate, no matter what the time or place. He then has to know
        where to go from there.

        > the
        > City of Seattle (Washington) gave him had "WASHINGTON UNIFORM
        > COURT DOCKET - DEFENDANT COPY" at the bottom. I know this
        > document is not a complaint nor is it a summons, because it is missing
        > the required elements of either a complaint or of a summons as
        > required
        > under the court rules.

        This failure to meet the rules should have been met with a refusal to
        accept it, not an outstretched hand and silence or a nod of agreement.
        Doesn't it provide for a promise?

        > In Washington, RCW 4.28.020 shows how a court acquires jurisdiction:
        >
        > "From the time of commencement of the action by service of summons, or
        > by the filing of a complaint, or as otherwise provided, the court is
        > deemed to
        > have acquired jurisdiction and to have control of all subsequent
        > proceedings"
        > [1984 c 76 � 2; 1895 c 86 � 4l 1893 c 127 � 15; RRS � 238.]
        >
        > Didn't know that kidnapping was a valid method for the court to
        > acquire jurisdiction.
        > Maybe that fits under "as otherwise provided" category.

        It does. Did you report a kidnapping to the FBI? Did you get a ransom
        note?

        > I am reading the codes and regulations as to how a "uniform court
        > docket" creates
        > an action that fits into the "as otherwise provided" category.
        >
        > Can you give me a hint on what to look for?

        Yes, look for voluntary acts of submission and avoid making them. I'm
        not in Washington and am not going to spend any time looking up
        Washington law for free (I've had an extremely bad day and now have a
        significantly wounded right hand), but here in California they achieve
        the same result with what the people have been trained to call "tickets"
        (there's no "tickets" in any laws). The real name of these "traffic
        tickets" is "Notice to Appear" and it secures a promise to appear on a
        date set certain for arraignment. By waiving rights to due process,
        jail time is put out of the picture. Most people make the trade-off and
        discover later that waiving rights is never a good idea.

        Regards,

        FF
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.