Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Indiana Blogs -> Indiana Barrister
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Indiana
: Indiana BarristerOrder in the Court
By Abdul Hakim-Shabazz
Indianapolis Attorney Paul Ogden has filed suit against the Marion County Traffic Court alleging the system is unfair and violates the Constitutional rights of defendants who challenge their parking tickets because they can be hit with additional fines totalling up to $500 if they are unsuccessful.
Ogden claims that violates due process. He also claims when traffic court is closed to the public it violates the Indiana Constitution’s requirement that Courts should be open.
Two points. First, I don’t think the closed court argument will get very far. If I remember correctly, the fire marshal’s office has a limit of 165 people in traffic court. If it’s a crowded day the defendants get priority and the public has to wait outside, if there’s room the public is allowed in. The defendants are the priority, not their family members who come to watch.
On the issue of excessive fines, I had to go back and check my notes from a Spring interview with Traffic Judge William Young. Young told me the point of the additional fine, which is allowed under Indiana law, is no different than what happens when someone refuses to plea bargain. If you are accused of a crime and the prosecution offers you 5 years for a guilty plea and you say no, they can ask for the maximum penalty and your rights to due process aren’t violated. If you are being fined more than the statute allows, then there is definitely an 8th Amendment violation.
The problem with most defendants is that they come to Court trying to game the system. They don’t hire an attorney to navigate them through court procedure or how to question the police officer who is their accuser on the radar gun that was used to record their speed. Instead, they hope the police won’t show and they can walk. Sorry folks, real life doesn’t work that way.
If Ogden and his clients don’t like Indiana’s traffic laws, they should petition the Legislature to change it. Marion County Traffic Court officials are simply doing what the law allows them to do.
And before I forget, one of Ogden’s clients was fined $25 for not wearing a seat belt. The client says he didn’t want to challenge the ticket because he “heard about the court policy regrading additional fines.” Maybe the client should have made a call because he would have found that a seat belt violation is $25 regardless if you challenge it and there are no additional fines, unlike other traffic offenses.
Full post as published by Indiana Barrister on December 09, 2009 (boomark / email).
Law & Order Depicts Police Procedures and Criminal Justice
Accuracy of Criminal Justice Depiction on Television
Selection of State Supreme Court Judges
How State Court Judges are Selected
Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Career Choices
Descriptions of law enforcement occupations
Domestic Violence
Women's Rights
California Supreme Court Proposition 8 Decision
Court Rejects Challenges to Proposition 8, but Finds Marriages Valid
Is Barack Obama a Natural Born Citizen?
Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz (Supreme Court): Does Obama meet the constitutional requirements to be President
Windows Software
Microsoft fined $1.3 billion for failing to comply with the European Union's antitrust order.
Ebay Fined
French Court Sets Fine at $61 Million
Personal Injury
Appeals Court Upholds Congressional Legislation
Tomato Salmonella
Sheetz Convenience Stores agrees to confidential out-of-court settlement with food poisoning victim.
National Association of Realtors
Settlement reached in broker listing antitrust lawsuit, pending court approval.
Missouri Attorney General's Office
$26,000 settlement reached in disability discrimination lawsuit, pending court approval.

More problems at the county court
Court Orders Access of Defense Counsel in Al-Timimi Case
Supreme Court depublishes class certification opinion: Bell v. Superior Court (H.F. Cox, Inc.)
Appeals Court Rule on Unpublished Decisions
Restraining Orders in California
European Court Annuls Iranian Fund Freeze Order









