Issues with a rally this coming June in Erie.

[Deleted]

Has any of the tickets even gone in front of the magistrate yet?

[Connal]

Has any of the tickets even gone in front of the magistrate yet?

They are doing all 8 on the 19th of yhis month. It took weeks for the citations to even come out.

[ray h]

They are doing all 8 on the 19th of yhis month. It took weeks for the citations to even come out.

I think it's a bad idea to do all of them at once. They should've forced the magistrate to recognize them one at a time to take up as much of the court's resouces as possible.
Pretty easy for me to say because I'm not the one paying for the defense.

[Deleted]

I think it's a bad idea to do all of them at once. They should've forced the magistrate to recognize them one at a time to take up as much of the court's resouces as possible.
Pretty easy for me to say because I'm not the one paying for the defense.

But what's the goal? Is it to be found not guilty and be done with it or to use this incident as a catapult to address preemption with the Superior Court? Reading the thread it's not very clear if there is a common goal or just pooled resources for defense at the magisterial level.

[ray h]

But what's the goal? Is it to be found not guilty and be done with it or to use this incident as a catapult to address preemption with the Superior Court? Reading the thread it's not very clear if there is a common goal or just pooled resources for defense at the magisterial level.

I think those two goals are very much the same but to be honest, they will be found guilty of the ordinance charge because they were guilty. What may save them though is the means at which they were IDed and the fact the summons' were mailed and not issued in person. Once at least one of them is found guilty, then you take it back to superior court.

[Connal]

But what's the goal? Is it to be found not guilty and be done with it or to use this incident as a catapult to address preemption with the Superior Court? Reading the thread it's not very clear if there is a common goal or just pooled resources for defense at the magisterial level.

I don't know all of it, since I wasn't one of the 8 that got citations.

From what Justin has told me, the chances of getting the same judge that denied the injunction, and losing for the citations.

Then appeal, and push it as far as possible.

The original judge, I believe it was Disantis? (sp) Said that although the law stated what it stated, he didn't agree with the wording.

[Deleted]

I think those two goals are very much the same but to be honest, they will be found guilty of the ordinance charge because they were guilty. What may save them though is the means at which they were IDed and the fact the summons' were mailed and not issued in person. Once at least one of them is found guilty, then you take it back to superior court.

No the goals are different then... everyone (or someone) needs to loose at the magistrate's office... put on a great show at the summary appeal at Common Pleas Court... loose again... and then have a good attorney prepare their brief for Superior Court.

The method of identification and the mailing the citations are side issues aimed at dismissal of the citation, not addressing preemption with the Superior Court. As far as the identification issue goes.. if they took pictures of the OC'rs and then ran plates and matched faces to J-Net photos... you have a looser there.. courts have already addressed the issue of there not being an expectation of privacy to license plate info.

Also the issuance of the citation through the mail is a looser too... the officer has 30 days from date of discovery of a violation or determination of the actors identity to file the citation.

[Deleted]

I don't know all of it, since I wasn't one of the 8 that got citations.

From what Justin has told me, the chances of getting the same judge that denied the injunction, and losing for the citations.

Then appeal, and push it as far as possible.

The original judge, I believe it was Disantis? (sp) Said that although the law stated what it stated, he didn't agree with the wording.

This is a real exciting case... I hope this works out.. would be an epic gun rights case for Pa.

[ray h]

No the goals are different then... everyone (or someone) needs to loose at the magistrate's office... put on a great show at the summary appeal at Common Pleas Court... loose again... and then have a good attorney prepare their brief for Superior Court.

The method of identification and the mailing the citations are side issues aimed at dismissal of the citation, not addressing preemption with the Superior Court. As far as the identification issue goes.. if they took pictures of the OC'rs and then ran plates and matched faces to J-Net photos... you have a looser there.. courts have already addressed the issue of there not being an expectation of privacy to license plate info.

Also the issuance of the citation through the mail is a looser too... the officer has 30 days from date of discovery of a violation or determination of the actors identity to file the citation.

Whatever....

[eagleclaw]

Also the issuance of the citation through the mail is a looser too... the officer has 30 days from date of discovery of a violation or determination of the actors identity to file the citation.

This is incorrect. This rule only applies to traffic citations. It is cited in PA 42 5553
5553. Summary offenses involving vehicles.
(a) General rule.--Except as provided in subsection (b) or
(c), proceedings for summary offenses under Title 75 (relating
to vehicles) must be commenced within 30 days after the
commission of the alleged offense or within 30 days after the
discovery of the commission of the offense or the identity of
the offender, whichever is later, and not thereafter.