WINNING TRAFFIC CASES - CLIENT SUCCESS STORIES!!
Here is a list of just some of the many representative client successes obtained over the years, by Attorney Felicia Woods-Yates in the Superior Courts of California, County of San Bernardino.
TRAFFIC CASE DISMISSALS SINCE JANUARY 2017
September 26, 2017:
We have enjoyed a great run of Case Dismissals since the beginning of the 2017 traffic and transportation season, while representing a variety of defendants assigned to the Barstow Superior Court. We have been able to achieve outright acquittals based upon both constitutional and evidentiary grounds. The cases have involved clients cited for Speeding in Excess of 100 MPH (California Vehicle Code Section 22348(b)), Speeding in a Commercial Vehicle (California Vehicle Code Section 22406(a)), Speeding in a Commercial Vehicle - Decreased Truck Limit (California Vehicle Code Section 22407), Reckless Navigation in a Watercraft (Harbors & Navigation Code Section 655(a)), Speeding in a Private Vehicle (California Vehicle Code Section 22356(b)), and Commercial Log Book Not Current (California Vehicle Code Section 34506.3-89). Here are just a few specific examples of the acquittals (total dismissals) we have been able to accomplish:
Client A: Cited for VC 22348(b) - 106 mph / 70 mph zone; $899 fine & 2 points eliminated.
Client B: Cited for VC 22348(b) - 101 mph / 70 mph zone; $899 fine & 2 points eliminated.
Client C: Cited for VC 22356(b) - 80 mph / 70 mph zone; $237.00 fine & 1 point eliminated.
Client D: Cited for VC 22406(a) - 65 mph / 55 mph zone; Speeding in a Commercial Vehicle; $489 fine & 1.5 points eliminated.
Client E: Cited for VC 22407 - 65 mph / 45 mph zone; $490 fine & 1.5 points eliminated.
Client F: Cited for HN 655(a) - Illegal Riding on Boat Transom; $280 fine eliminated.
Client G: Cited for VC 22406(a) - 72 mph / 55 mph zone; Speeding in a Commercial Vehicle; $489 fine & 1.5 points eliminated.
Client H: Cited for VC 22406(a) - "70 mph +" / 55 mph zone; Speeding in a Commercial Vehicle; $489 fine & 1.5 points eliminated.
Client I: Cited for VC 22356(b) - 82 mph / 70 mph zone; $238 fine & 1 point eliminated.
Client J: Cited for VC 222349(b) - 74 mph / 55 mph zone, VC 16028(a) - No Proof of Insurance, and VC 4000(a) - No Vehicle Registration; $1,549.00 fine & 1 point eliminated.
Client K: Cited for CVC 22450(a) - Failure to Stop; $237 fine & 1 point eliminated.
Client L: Cited for VC 22406(A) - 69 mph / 55 mph zone; Speeding in a Commercial Vehicle; $489 fine & 1.5 points eliminated.
Client M: Cited for CVC 22406(a) - 69 mph / 55 mph zone; Speeding in a Commercial Vehicle; $489 fine & 1.5 points eliminated.
Client N: Cited for CVC 22356(b) - ">91" mph / 70 mph zone; $366 fine & 1 point eliminated.
Client O: Cited for CVC 22348(b) - 104 mph / 70 mph zone; $899 fine & 2 points eliminated.
Client P: Cited for CVC 22406(a) - "70+" mph / 55 mph zone; $489 fine, and 1.5 points eliminated.
Client Q: Cited for CVC 22348(b) - 106 mph / 70 mph zone; $899 fine, and 2 points eliminated.
2017 HAS ALREADY PROVEN TO BE A GREAT YEAR
FOR OUR MANY TRAFFIC CLIENTS
A variety of alleged traffic violations have been handled by our office during the month of January in both the Barstow Superior Courts & Fontana Superior Courts. Our clients were issued traffic tickets ranging from Speeding in Excess of 100 MPH (CVC 22348b), Out of Designated Lane for a Commercial Vehicle (CVC 22348c), Speeding in Excess of 70 MPH (CVC 22356b), and the alleged violation we handle the most often for our CDL clients - Speeding in a Commercial Vehicle (CVC 22406a). Bail assessments (the amount the court would require a defendant to pay if they were not contesting the citation) in these matters reached as high as $899.00 - even on a first offense.
We are pleased to report that every single traffic matter - one hundred percent (100%) - on which we were retained, were dismissed or thrown out on constitutional or evidentiary grounds by the court at the court trial phase, during the month of January 2017. No underlying charge impacting our client's motor vehicle records, and no fine monies to be paid to the County or to the State of California!! A clean sweep...
OUR STREAK OF CASE SUCCESSES CONTINUED ON JULY 14, 2016, IN THE BARSTOW SUPERIOR COURT
We had a variety of traffic defendants we recently represented in the high desert area, facing charges ranging from Speeding in a Commercial Vehicle, to Exceeding 100 MPH, to Speeding in a Private Vehicle. Seventy-five percent (75%) of those case were either Dismissed outright, or Amended in some manner to avoid DMV "points" or excessively high fine amounts. In one instance, we prepared evidence to present to the Court in order to lay the foundation for a "legal excuse" as to why my client's vehicle was traveling at a higher than normal rate of speed while on a family vacation - the case was ultimately dismissed by the Court!
A CLEAN SWEEP FOR OUR CDL CLIENTS DURING THE APRIL 7 & APRIL 15, 2016 COURT SESSIONS IN BARSTOW SUPERIOR COURT
Once again, all of our CDL clients received an amended (reduced) charge OR an outright dismissal during their respective court trials in Barstow, California!
We represented multiple CDL holders cited for everything from Unsafe Lane Changes to Speeding in a Commercial Vehicle - in one case, a CDL holder was cited for traveling 83 MPH while operating a semi-truck on the interstate highway. Under California law, traveling at a speed 15 miles per hour or more above the posted speed limit (55 MPH) in a commercial vehicle is known as a "wobbler", which means the client could have faced Misdemeanor penalties (which carry a potential 60-day license suspension - fines of $1,000 and up - and the discretion of being sentenced to time in the local county jail: usually no less than 30 days). We obviously had our work cut out for us...
The results were that all of our clients, including the commercial driver suspected of 83 MPH, were either Dismissed or Amended to Non-Pointable / Non-Moving Offenses! Needless to say, we could not be more pleased for our clients - whom rely upon their CDL licenses everyday, to earn a decent standard of living!!
WHEN IT CAME TO OBTAINING A DISMISSAL OR AMENDED CHARGE FOR OUR CDL CLIENTS, AND IN HONOR OF THE MLB SPRING TRAINING SEASON, OUR "BATTING AVERAGE" WAS A PERFECT .1,000 AT A RECENT SESSION IN BARSTOW SUPERIOR
All of our CDL clients received an amended (reduced) charge OR an outright dismissal, at the February 19, 2016 court trial proceedings. The clients were all facing the same charge - CVC 22406(a) - Speeding in a Commercial Vehicle. Their speeds ranged from 65, to 69, to 70 mph, while traveling in an area with a posted speed limit of 55 mph.
Fortunately, everyone was able to completely AVOID any and all negligent operator points, despite the original allegations by the citing law enforcement officers which carried the potential of 1.5 points for each violation - and we didn't even need to stop for a seventh-inning-stretch!
HIGH DESERT SUCCESSES IN THE BARSTOW SUPERIOR COURT (Eighty-Five (85%) of our Cases Were Either Dismissed or Amended to Non Pointable Traffic Violations)
During a recent court trial session on January 21, 2016 in the Barstow Superior Court, several drivers were accused of traveling in excess of 100 mph. We obtained an outright case DISMISSAL for one particular client who was cited for traveling 123 mph! At the Court Trial, it was shown that the citing officer was not able to prove all of the necessary elements to support a finding of guilt as to the charge - a violation of California Vehicle Code section 22348b.
In two other cases involving speeds of 110 mph and 102 mph - we also obtained outright DISMISSALS of those charges as well.
On yet another speeding in excess of 100 mph - 110 mph to be exact - the original charge was negotiated to an amended violation of California Vehicle Code section 22356b (speeding in excess of 70 mph), thereby reducing the negligent operator point count from two (2), down to only one (1).
In another case involving a non-commercial driver towing a trailer at an allegedly high rate of speed - 70 mph in a 55 mph zone - a modified charge was negotiated. This resulted in the client going from facing a moving violation which carries one (1) negligent operator point, to a NON-MOVING offense, which carries NO POINTS on the driver's motor vehicle record.
100 % SUCCESS RATE DURING JULY 2015 COURT APPEARANCE
In a recent session out at the Joshua Tree Superior Court, our group of clients received success - on each and every traffic case. The pending traffic charges ranged from speeding in a commercial vehicle, to failure to present evidence of financial responsibility. Our office was able to accomplish everything from an outright Dismissal to a series of amended charges for our CDL and non-CDL clients, resulting in No Points and No Moving violations appearing on their motor vehicle records.
While 80% or more of our clients hold commercial driver's licenses (CDLs) from across the country, we do still represent our fair share of non-commercial drivers. We recently had the pleasure of helping out a gentlemen who was a non-CDL holder, and was facing a prospective fine in excess of $1,300.00. He was charged with two traffic counts - speeding at 32 mph above the posted speed limit, and failure to provide proof of financial responsibility. In California, if you are cited for traveling more than 25 mph above any posted speed limit in a non-commercial vehicle, you are not automatically eligible for traffic school - let alone any type of reduced count or amended fine amount. We were able to get both counts dismissed, and replaced by a non-pointable vehicle code section, and avoided the requirement that the client would have to attend traffic school just to keep his record clean. In addition, we saved the client over $800.00 in total fine monies!
2015 HAS STARTED WITH A STRING OF CASE SUCCESSES!!
In particular, our CDL clients have received very favorable case dispositions, up to and including outright Dismissals. During a recent session in the Joshua Tree Superior courthouse, two-thirds (2/3) of the court trials being handled, in which my office was attorney of record, were Dismissed for lack of prosecution. One of the case dismissals involved a CDL holder who was facing two counts (Speeding in a Commercial Vehicle - a violation of California Vehicle Code section 22406a, and a Log Book Not Current - a violation of California Vehicle Code section 34506.3-89). In California, those two violations alone, carry the potential of three (3) Negligent Operator Points; one (1) more Negligent Operator Point within a twelve-month period on a CDL holders record, may result in a license suspension! In addition, the bail amount in this particular matter was in excess of $900.00. Ultimately, both charged counts, as well as the bail/fine, were Dismissed in total by the Court.
NEW CASE UPDATES TO REPORT FROM THE JOSHUA TREE SUPERIOR COURT, BARSTOW SUPERIOR COURT, VICTORVILLE SUPERIOR COURT and FONTANA SUPERIOR COURT (2014)
Twenty-Fourteen brought our traffic clients a lot success inside the San Bernardino County Superior Courts. CDL holders were able to avoid Negligent Operator Points, the stigma of Moving Violations, and in some cases, Lowered Fine amounts and Suspended civil Assessments and Penalties (California Penal Code sections 1203, 1203.1, and 1203(b) give a Judge the discretion to suspend the minimum sentence, including Fines and Penalties). This in addition to multiple Case Dismissals! During a mid-October Court session at the Joshua Tree Superior Court in Joshua Tree, CA, our office obtained a Dismissal rate of Fifty Percent (50%)!!
MORE CASE SUCCESSES TO REPORT FROM THE HIGH DESERT COURTS IN SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY (July 2013)
These cases involved a cross section of traffic charges ranging from Speeding in a Commercial Vehicle - California Vehicle Code Section 22406(a), to Possession of Less Than an Ounce of Marijuana - California Vehicle Code Section 23222(b).
Eighty Percent (80%) of the cases our office handled in the Joshua Tree Superior Court resulted in an outright DISMISSAL of all pending charges! In another such matter, 4 out of the 5 pending counts were DISMISSED, and the remaining count was amended to a "NO POINTS" outcome for the client.
A commercial driver (CDL holder) was cited by the California Highway Patrol for traveling 81 MPH in a 55 MPH zone; this resulted in the driver facing a Misdemeanor charge in the Victorville Superior Court. The driver was also facing an additional charge for being Out of the Designated Lane.
The client received a Terminal Disposition (No Probation), and had the charges reduced to a single "NO POINTS" vehicle code offense, with a modest fine amount, and no jail time required!
IMPRESSIVE RESULTS OBTAINED IN THE HISTORIC JOSHUA TREE SUPERIOR COURT (June 2013)
Commercial license (CDL) holder cited for traveling 70 MPH in a 55 MPH zone.
A "NO POINTS" disposition.
Non-Commercial driver cited for Speeding and No Proof of Insurance, back in June 2008, with a subsequent FTA (Failure to Appear) charge and a Civil Assessment of $300.00 added to the original bail; totaling a bail amount of $1,404.00.
Attorney Yates was able to obtain a complete CASE DISMISSAL of all pending traffic charges, and TOTAL ELIMINATION of the $1,404.00 fine.
Commercial license (CDL) holder cited for CVC 22348(c) - Out of Designated Lane.
A "NO POINTS" disposition.
Commercial license (CDL) holder was cited for traveling 69 MPH in a 55 MPH zone; client failed to appear at the Superior Court for the initial proceeding (the Arraignment); as result, a $300.00 Civil Assessment was added to the original bail amount, and an FTA (Failure to Appear) hold was placed on the client's MVR.
Attorney Felicia Yates conducted a Pre-Trial negotiation with the citing officer , and three (3) out of the four (4) pending counts were DISMISSED by the Joshua Tree Superior Court, and the original charge of Speeding was reduced to a "NO POINTS" disposition, with a lowered fine amount.
Commercial license (CDL) holder was cited for CVC 23111 - Throwing a Lighted Substance from the Vehicle (Littering); this charge resulted in the client facing a potentially high fine amount (the State of California takes their Littering statutes very seriously!), and the loss of his employment status from a national motor carrier.
A Pre-Trial negotiation took place, and the original charge of Littering was plea bargained away, and replaced with a "NO POINTS" disposition, and a fine amount that would be considered about 50% less than most Littering charges would require a person to pay to the Joshua Tree Superior Court.
"SMOKING HOT" TRAFFIC ACCOMPLISHMENTS IN THE DESERT COURTS OF SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY !! (June 2012 - April 2013)
A commercial license (CDL) holder traveling through California on vacation in a private vehicle was issued a traffic citation for driving well in excess of 80 MPH on the Interstate 40 Highway, with a posted maximum speed limit of 70 MPH.
A "NO POINTS" disposition.
Two other CDL holders received a traffic ticket for speeding in excess of 69 MPH and 65 MPH respectively, while in commercial vehicles, in an area with a maximum speed limit of 55 MPH for trucks.
"NO POINTS" dispositions for both drivers.
A client with a nine (9) year old traffic matter sought the help of Attorney Felicia Yates to remove a civil assessment (typically a $300.00 penalty in San Bernardino County), lift a hold on the client's DMV record (adversely affecting the status of the license and vehicle registration), and negotiate a reasonable settlement.
A complete case DISMISSAL.
Another commercial license holder was issued a traffic ticket under California Vehicle Code section 21461(a): i.e. - "Sign Violation" or "Emergency Parking Only" - Important Note: Many drivers may be unaware, but this particular vehicle code section carries 1.5 points in the state of California for a CDL holder in a commercial vehicle.
A "NO POINTS" disposition.
A non-commercial driver in a private vehicle was given a speeding ticket for traveling 105 MPH on the Interstate 40 Highway.
Traffic School was granted by the Judge, and No License Suspension was levied.
Another driver in a private vehicle was also cited for speeding in excess of 100 MPH (the exact alleged speed was actually 112 MPH!).
Traffic School was granted by the Judge, and No License Suspension was levied.
Multiple commercial license holders this summer have received various types of moving and non-moving traffic violations along the Interstate 40 and Interstate 15 Highways (speeding; out of designated lane; sign or emergency parking only violations; etc.)
More than eighty percent (80%) of these traffic cases were either COMPLETELY DISMISSED or negotiated down to a "NO POINTS" settlement!
MULTIPLE TRAFFIC CASES DISMISSED OUTRIGHT BY THE NEEDLES SUPERIOR COURT (May 2012)
Attorney Felicia Yates had 19 total traffic cases during the month of May 2012, in the Needles Superior Court. The charges included a variety of commercial and non-commercial traffic violations such as Speeding in Excess of 100 MPH, Speeding in a Commercial Vehicle, Stopping in Area Designated as "Emergency Parking Only ", and Speeding in a Non-Commercial Vehicle in Excess of 25 MPH Over the Posted Speed Limit.
Almost ONE-THIRD of these cases were completely DISMISSED (No Charges Reported to the State DMV - No Fine Money Owed to the Superior Court), based upon various legal grounds presented to the Court by Attorney Yates.
In one of these traffic cases involving a client traveling in excess of 100 MPH, the highway patrol officer who issued the traffic citation filed a request with the Court to obtain a 30-day continuance due to other obligations. Attorney Yates filed a motion opposing the officer's request, based upon her client's constitutional Right to a Speedy Trial within 45 days of the initial court appearance. After reviewing all the available evidence, the Superior Court Judge GRANTED Attorney Yates' request, and the client's case was ultimately DISMISSED on procedural grounds.
EXCESSIVE SPEEDING VIOLATION - 120 + MPH (April 2012)
A non-commercial driver was cited by the California Highway Patrol for traveling 120 miles per hour plus on the Interstate 40 highway outside of Needles, California...
In preparation for the April 2012 Court Trial proceeding, Attorney Yates drafted a Sworn Declaration for the client to execute, which provided effective information in behalf of the client's position. As a result, Attorney Yates was able to negotiate this traffic ticket down to a much less severe California vehicle code section, thereby making the client eligible for TRAFFIC SCHOOL.
LOG BOOK VIOLATION - BAIL IN EXCESS OF $2,000 (April 2012)
A commercial driver was cited by the California Highway Patrol for a log book containing pages with "blank or missing" entries. The bail amount the client was facing in this case exceeded two-thousand ($2,000) dollars!!
A Sworn Declaration was once again prepared and presented by Attorney Yates at the April 2012 Court Trial, which enabled her to obtain a complete CASE DISMISSAL of the log book traffic charges.
FORTY-PERCENT (40%) CASE DISMISSAL RATE (January 2012)
In January 2012, Attorney Felicia Yates conducted MULTIPLE Court Trial proceedings in the Needles Superior Court on behalf of a variety of clients who had received traffic citations and speeding tickets for both commercial and non-commercial traffic and transportation violations...
Attorney Yates was able to achieve a FORTY-PERCENT DISMISSAL RATE on behalf of her traffic and transportation clients. The following is a sample of the types of traffic charges that were dismissed in the interest of justice by the Court, on both evidentiary and procedural grounds: Commercial Lane Straddling - DISMISSED; Commercial Speeding Violation - DISMISSED; Log Book Violation - DISMISSED; Exceeding Posted Speed Limit of 70 MPH - DISMISSED.
COMMERCIAL SPEEDING VIOLATION - 69 + MPH (2011)
A CDL holder was cited by the California Highway Patrol for traveling "69 + MPH" in a Commercial Vehicle...
Despite the alleged speed in a commercial vehicle, Attorney Yates was able to negotiate a reduced charge to a California vehicle code section which carries NO POINTS.
EXCESSIVE SPEEDING VIOLATION - 120 MPH (2011)
A non-commercial driver was cited by the California Highway Patrol for traveling 120 miles per hour on the Interstate 40 highway outside of Needles, California...
At the Court Trial proceeding, Attorney Yates was able to negotiate this charge down to a much less severe California vehicle code section, thereby making the client eligible for TRAFFIC SCHOOL.
COMMERCIAL SPEEDING VIOLATION (2011)
A CDL holder was cited by the California Highway Patrol for traveling in excess of the 55 MPH speed limit in a Commercial Vehicle...
Attorney Yates was able to obtain a complete CASE DISMISSAL of the traffic charges.
COMMERCIAL TRAFFIC VIOLATION (2011)
A CDL Trainer (accompanying a CDL Trainee) was cited by the California Highway Patrol for illegally parking in an "Emergency Parking Only" area at the crest of a hill outside of Needles, California...
Attorney Yates prepared and presented evidence at the Court Trial proceeding which convinced the Highway Patrol officer and the Judge, that the Trainer was NOT AT FAULT. This resulted in a complete CASE DISMISSAL on behalf of the client.
DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE (DUI) - BLOOD ALCOHOL GREATER THAN O.O8% (2011)
Client was cited by a law enforcement agency for driving under the influence, and was charged by the San Bernardino County District Attorney with a DUI involving a blood alcohol concentration higher than O.O8%...
During the Pre-Trial stage of the case, Attorney Yates presented evidence, which convinced the Prosecutor to reduce the charge to a Dry Reckless Driving. The client's DRIVING PRIVILEGE WAS NOT SUSPENDED, there were NO DUI CLASSES to attend, and the client's DMV RECORD WILL NOT REFLECT A DUI or WET RECKLESS CONVICTION.
You may submit your new case information online for a Free Consultation, and we will contact you within 24 hours!
My office may be able to obtain favorable results for you! I have been in practice for over 35 years, and have a very high success rate ! Please contact me today for a FREE case evaluation at (760) 326-5297 - Call Anytime !
Attorney at Law
*** Updates pending***
The information presented on this website should not be construed as legal advice as it is presented as information only. Nor does viewing the information contained on this website form an attorney-client relationship. There is no substitute for consulting with an attorney regarding the specific facts of a legal matter. Please note that substantive law and procedure discussed on this website may have changed as a result of legislation, judicial interpretations or changes in administrative policies or procedures.
Note: This website is not intended to offer services to clients for any matter outside the jurisdiction of the State of California.