rcd@ico.isc.com (Dick Dunn) (11/03/90)
doug@letni.UUCP (Doug Davis) writes, among other things: > Of course you all know that technically if you pay a moving violation traffic > ticket you were "arrested" and "convicted." Keep that in mind the > next time you fill out a job application..... The :-) is missing. This is wrong, of course. There are various sorts of laws which you are expected to obey. Not every violation of a law is a crime. There are a few traffic laws which, if violated, will get you arrested. Most won't. You'll have to pay a fine, but you won't go to jail. You'll have a traffic-violation record, but that's not a criminal record. Best to keep the two straight. -- Dick Dunn rcd@ico.isc.com -or- ico!rcd Boulder, CO (303)449-2870 ...but Meatball doesn't work that way!
jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II) (11/04/90)
In article <1990Nov2.202722.13748@ico.isc.com> rcd@ico.isc.com (Dick Dunn) writes: >The :-) is missing. This is wrong, of course. There are various sorts of >laws which you are expected to obey. Not every violation of a law is a >crime. There are a few traffic laws which, if violated, will get you >arrested. Most won't. You'll have to pay a fine, but you won't go to >jail. You'll have a traffic-violation record, but that's not a criminal >record. Best to keep the two straight. I believe this statement is wrong. When I enlisted in the Navy in 1981 they asked about =every= arrest, =including= minor traffic infractions from when I was just starting out driving. In New Orleans, for example, parking tickets were part of the criminal code. The judges knew the city would be unable to legally convict an owner of a car that was parked illegally because there was no proof that the owner was also the driver. In fact, the standard defense was to claim that you weren't driving the car at the time the ticket was issued. Over a several year period there was not a single case decided in favor of the city when this ploy was used. Finally, parking tickets were moved out of the criminal code and into the civil code. -- John F. Haugh II UUCP: ...!cs.utexas.edu!rpp386!jfh Ma Bell: (512) 832-8832 Domain: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org "SCCS, the source motel! Programs check in and never check out!" -- Ken Thompson
doug@letni.UUCP (Doug Davis) (11/06/90)
In article <1990Nov2.202722.13748@ico.isc.com> rcd@ico.isc.com (Dick Dunn) writes: >doug@letni.UUCP (Doug Davis) writes, among other things: >> Of course you all know that technically if you pay a moving violation traffic >> ticket you were "arrested" and "convicted." Keep that in mind the >> next time you fill out a job application..... > >The :-) is missing. No it isn't. The :-( might be.. >This is wrong, of course. No it isn't. >There are various sorts of laws which you are expected to obey. >Not every violation of a law is a crime. Uh, by its vary nature the violation of a law is a criminal act. >There are a few traffic laws which, if violated, will get you arrested. With the exception of some city ordiences, any ticket that is handed to you via an officer of the law is technically an arrest when you sign the bottom line. Read the fine print on the next speeding ticket you get. I quote the lines "Signature of arrested person:" from one of mine. At least in LA, TX, OK, and CA, they have all said the same or similer things. >Most won't. You'll have to pay a fine, but you won't go to >jail. You'll have a traffic-violation record, but that's not a criminal >record. Best to keep the two straight. A "traffic-violation record" is a misnomer, what you have is a record of offenses, both major and minor. A speeding ticket is considered a minor infraction of the law. All though still not a lawyer, As a cronic collector of speeding tickets I have lots of experience in this area. :-( doug __ Doug Davis/4409 Sarazen/Mesquite Texas, 75150/214-270-9226 {texsun|lawnet|smu}!letni!doug doug@letni.lonestar.org "Be seeing you..."
clouds@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Kathy Strong) (11/06/90)
In several articles, either doug@letni.UUCP (Doug Davis) or rcd@ico.isc.com (Dick Dunn) writes: > Of course you all know that technically if you pay a moving violation traffic > ticket you were "arrested" and "convicted." Keep that in mind the > next time you fill out a job application..... >This is wrong, of course. > >No it isn't. > >There are a few traffic laws which, if violated, will get you arrested. >With the exception of some city ordiences, any ticket that is handed >to you via an officer of the law is technically an arrest when you sign >the bottom line. Read the fine print on the next speeding ticket >you get. I quote the lines "Signature of arrested person:" from one >of mine. At least in LA, TX, OK, and CA, they have all said the same >or similer things. > >Most won't. You'll have to pay a fine, but you won't go to >jail. You'll have a traffic-violation record, but that's not a criminal >record. Best to keep the two straight. > As the proud owner of a brand-new speeding ticket, I decided to search for truth. * Nowhere on this form am I addressed as "arrested person." The box where I signed is labeled "Drivers Signature: This is not a plea of guilty." * What did I agree to when I signed my name: "I hereby acknowledge receipt of this written notice to appear in court and I promise (agree) to appear at Municipal Court (address, etc.) on the court date stated above. I under- stand that if I only wish to pay this citation, I may appear in court up to five calendar days prior to the court date stated above. If no court date is written above, I promise (agree) to appear at municipal court on the tenth (10th) business (M-F) day after this citation was issued." * From the back of the notice, in a box labeled Please Read Carefully: FAILURE TO APPEAR AS DIRECTED IS A VIOLATION OF LAW AND WILL BE PUNISHABLE BY A FINE OF $200.00 AND CAN CAUSE YOUR ARREST AND CONFINEMENT IN JAIL [emphasis added] ..." It looks to me as though the person who said "if you pay a ticket, technically you were arrested and convicted" is wrong--at least in Austin, Texas. From that, I extrapolate (uh-oh, look out!) that a traffic-violation record is not a criminal record. Hope that's correct--I'd hate to be broke AND a crook. --K . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Kathy Strong : "Welcome to FUBAR Corp., where there's (Clouds moving slowly) : never enough time to do a job right, clouds@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu : but always enough time to do it over."
jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II) (11/06/90)
In article <39194@ut-emx.uucp> clouds@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Kathy Strong) writes: >In several articles, either doug@letni.UUCP (Doug Davis) or rcd@ico.isc.com >(Dick Dunn) writes: >> I quote the lines "Signature of arrested person:" from one >>of mine. At least in LA, TX, OK, and CA, they have all said the same >>or similer things. Well, I just checked an old LA speeding ticket and it says "I understand the terms and conditions of this citation and promise to appear at the time and place shown above. Failure to appear will be cause for the suspension of my driving privileges and the imposition of an additional fine by the Louisiana Department of Public Safety Signed By: _____________________________________________ THIS SIGNATURE IS NOT AN ADMISSION OF GUILT " Hmmm. >>Most won't. You'll have to pay a fine, but you won't go to >>jail. You'll have a traffic-violation record, but that's not a criminal >>record. Best to keep the two straight. I'd go get my USN enlistment crap, but it is buried under a ton of other crap. Trust me, it's a criminal record. >It looks to me as though the person who said "if you pay a ticket, technically >you were arrested and convicted" is wrong--at least in Austin, Texas. From >that, I extrapolate (uh-oh, look out!) that a traffic-violation record is >not a criminal record. Hope that's correct--I'd hate to be broke AND a crook. I know this doesn't count as a legal opinion, but read an employment application sometime - most ask you to "list any criminal convictions, excluding traffic offenses" or something to that effect. Others just ask for felony convictions, and traffic offenses are misdemeanors. I tried calling the Austin police, but they must still be asleep ... -- John F. Haugh II UUCP: ...!cs.utexas.edu!rpp386!jfh Ma Bell: (512) 832-8832 Domain: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org "SCCS, the source motel! Programs check in and never check out!" -- Ken Thompson
glr@igloo.scum.com (Glen Roberts) (11/07/90)
Technically, a CRIMINAL action is a legal action by the State against an individual, where a CIVIL action is amongst individuals. Because of the enormous resources of the State and Politics, extra protections to the Defendant were added in CRIMINAL actions. This however, made it difficult for the State to handle trivial offenses (especially for them to make money on them), so most states have converted minior CRIMES into CIVIL actions. Technically, an arrest is whenever you are deprived of your liberty by an official of the State. It does not have to be a physical deprivation. A situation where a normal person would not think they could leave voluntarily would consitite an arrest. It is certainly not this type of arrest that one is asking about on employement applications. :wq
zane@ddsw1.MCS.COM (Sameer Parekh) (11/08/90)
I would like to contribute my piece to this discussion:
It is true that employers ask if you have been convicted of a crime.
However, most applications I saw asked if you were convicted of a felony (maybe
they didn't say felony, but they said a specific level of a crime)
I don't know if a trarric violation (speeding, etc.) would be called
arresting but I do think that if you WERE arrested and convicted (if you go
to court and made to pay) then it wouldn't be a felony or the level the
employers ask of.
--
zane@ddsw1.MCS.COM