click here for a money back traffic ticket guarantee
 The home of Westchester Traffic Ticket Attorney :: Westchester Criminal Defense Attorney :: Westchester Traffic Defense Lawyer
Westchester County Traffic and Criminal Courts are interesting.  They can best be described with the famous line from literature "It was the best of times... it was the worst of times."  Or perhaps, "The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly..."  That means to say that going to some Westchester Traffic Courts is a relatively pleasant experience, where one faced with speeding ticket, for example, can walk out with no points and just a fine... while other courts are a very difficult indeed and there is virtually no plea bargaining.  In any case, if you hire me, an experienced former police officer turned NY Traffic Ticket Attorney to fight your Westchester Speeding and Traffic violations in traffic courts such as Harrison Town Court, Yonkers City Court, Greenburgh Town Court, White Plains City Court, New Rochelle City Court and Harrison Town Court and Bedford Town Court, to name a few, then you will get excellent service, and one of the best in the business to fight your ticket.  In most cases you don't have to miss work to show up to court, I can show up the Westchester Traffic Court for you.  Here is a client's testimonial and letter of appreciation after I got a difficult speeding ticket in Mamaroneck Village Court reduced to a no point parking ticket.
For the quickest response:  Scan and email me your summons or appearance ticket to: 
Westchester Traffic Attorne
y Email or fax it to fax# 845-818-3905
NY Criminal Atty  Upstate NY Ticket Lawyer Rockland Ticket Atty
If you are facing a 2 Point Crossing over Double Yellow Line in Tarrytown Village Court, a 11 Point School Zone Speeding in Peekskill City Court, a 11 Point Speeding in Ossining Town Court, a 2 Point Blocking Driver's view in Pelham Town Court, a 2 Point Careless Driving in Pleasantville Village Court, a 2 Point Careless Driving in Port Chester Village Court, a 2 Point Crossing over Double Yellow Line in Pound Ridge Town Court, a 2 Point Driving on Shoulder in Avenue Pound Ridge, a 2 Point driving on sidewalk in Rye Town Court, a 2 Point Fail to signal in Scarsdale Town Court, a 2 Point Fail to signal (which may not show up on your Canadian record at all) in North Castle Town Court, a 2 Point Failed to use care in Somers Town Court, a 2 Point Failure to comply with lawful order in Tuckahoe Village Court, a 2 point Failure to obey a lawful order in White Plains City Court, a 2 Point Failure to signal in Yorktown Town Court, a 2 Point Failure to yield to pedestrian (NJ) in Sleepy Hollow Village Court, a 2 Point improper Turn in New Rochelle City Court, a 2 point speeding in Yonkers City Court - Traffic Part, a 2 Unsafe Backing in Mt. Vernon City Court, a 3 Drove to the left of pavement markings in Rye City Court, a 3 Point Child not in seatbelt in Yonkers Criminal Court, a 3 point disobey green arrow in Scarsdale Village Court, a 3 Point driving wrong way on one-way street (VTL 1127A) in Harrison Town Court, a 3 point Failure to keep right in Ardsley Village Court, a 3 Point Failure to Yield in Bedford Town Court, a 3 point improper Passing in Briarcliff Manor Village Court, a 3 Point interfering with safe operation in Bronxville Village Court, a 3 Point non-work zone Speeding in Buchanan Village Court, a 3 point Red Light in Cortlandt Town Court, a 3 Point Speeding in Croton-on-Hudson Village Court, a 3 Point Speeding ticket in Dobbs Ferry Village Court, a 3 Point Stop Sign in Eastchester Town Court, a 3 Point Stop Sign in North Salem Town Court, a 3 point Unsafe Lane Change in Greenburgh Town Court, a 3 point Unsafe Passing in Ossining Village Court, a 3 Point Unsafe U-Turn in Hastings-on-Hudson Village Court, a 3 Point Work Zone Speeding in Irvington Village Court, a 3 Points in Canada Speeding in Larchmont Village Court, a 39:4-97.2 (No Point Unsafe Driving) in Lewisboro Town Court, a 4 Point Following too closely in Mamaroneck Town Court, a 4 Point Improper Passing in Mamaroneck Village Court, a 4 Point School Zone Speeding in Mount Kisco Town Court, a 4 Point Speeding in Mount Pleasant Town Court, a 4 Point Work Zone Speeding in New Castle Town Court, a 5 Point Following too Closely in Elmsford Village Court, a 5 Point Passing School Bus in North Tarrytown Village Court,

I.                   Introduction to Vehicle and Traffic Law.

a.    Laws found in VAT at, for example

b.    Contact me with questions and further info at

II.                Do points transfer from out of state

a.    Points only transfer from Ontario and Quebec, not from New Jersey or any other state

III.             Traffic Violation Bureau Tickets TVB

a.    Violations received in 5 Boroughs, Rochester, Buffalo, and some jurisdictions in Suffolk County

b.    Administrative hearing

                                                              i.      Clear and convincing evidence

                                                            ii.      No plea bargaining

                                                          iii.      Administrative hearing officers � lawyers, not judges         

c.    How to plead not guilty

                                                              i.      On-line

                                                            ii.      Mail in ticket

                                                          iii.      Plead not guilty in person in one of the TVB offices

                                                         iv.      Attorney may appear for motorist, client need not appear

d.    How to win

                                                              i.      Officer is no show 2-3 times

                                                            ii.      Officer does not have his notes

                                                          iii.      Catch the officer in a mistake during trial

e.    Conviction rate is high

                                                              i.      Officer need not present written proof of radar and speedometer calibration

f.      30 days to appeal

                                                              i.      appeals can be initiated on-line

1.    can appeal sentence and/or conviction

                                                            ii.      must order transcript

                                                          iii.      appeals are all on submission � no oral arguments

IV.            All other courts

a.    Traffic violations are �quasi-criminal�

                                                              i.      Almost all violations can carry a minimum of 15 days in jail

                                                            ii.      Unethical to guarantee the results

                                                          iii.      Right to represented by retained (as opposed to appointed) counsel.

                                                         iv.      Right to request adjournment to retain attorney

                                                           v.      Speedy Trial � constitutional right to have trial within 2 years

1.    People v. Thorpe (see case materials)

                                                         vi.      Double Jeopardy

1.    can�t be issued 2 speeding tickets for speeding on same road, for example

                                                       vii.      Right to remain silent � don�t need to testimony

b.    Majority are plea bargained.

c.    Not guilty plea and process

                                                              i.      Fill out ticket and mail it in

                                                            ii.      Most courts will accept attorney�s letter for not guilty in place of original tickets

                                                          iii.      State Trooper tickets         

1.    negotiate with District attorney or Local Prosecutor

a.     call court to find out who is prosecutor

                                                         iv.      Local officers

1.    either negotiate with them directly or with local prosecutor

                                                           v.      Clients need not show up

1.    must have notarized affidavit authorizing attorney to appear without client and plea to a lesser charge

2.    some courts require original document, some accept copy of affidavit.

                                                         vi.      Payment of fine

1.    most courts give time to pay

2.    more and more courts accept credit card

3.    pay on line with government payment service

4.    money order to court

5.    license gets suspended if not paid on time

d.    Right to supporting deposition

                                                              i.      Most tickets today are electronic and depositions are provided at time of ticket being issued

                                                            ii.      If not provided at time, have 30 days to request from return date on ticket

1.    officer then has 30 days to serve the deposition on defendant or attorney if represented by attorney and file and proof of service with court.

2.    If motorist is represented by attorney, service must be on attorney

                                                          iii.      Remedy for not providing supporting deposition

1.    dismissal

2.    Officer can reserve ticket in form of �Long Form�

a.     However see People v. Rosenfeld

3.    Some courts require motions to dismiss to be in writing with notice to the people and within 45 days of first appearance in court.

e.    Trials

                                                              i.      People must make prima facie case

1.    Read law to determine elements of violation

a.     After People�s case, if they left out an element, make a �Trial Order for Dismissal� for failure to make out a prima facie case.

2.    Standard of proof is beyond a reasonable doubt

3.    no jury trial unless a misdemeanor

a.     such as aggravated unlicensed driver (driving on suspended license)

b.    reckless driving

c.     drunk driving

d.    driving while registration revoked

V.               Appeals in Courts outside of TVB

a.    30 days to file �Notice of Appeal�

b.    Appealing party (usually defendant in our context) is known as Appellant

                                                              i.      Must order transcript and serve Prosecutor who is known as �Respondent� in appellate practice.

                                                            ii.      Must keep track of timeliness

c.    Appeals in NYC area (outside the TVB) in for example, Nassau County, Orange, Rockland, Dutchess and Westchester Counties

                                                              i.      Heard in the Appellate Term

d.    Appeals in other Upstate Counties such as and Sullivan

                                                              i.      Heard in County Court

PEOPLE v. THORPE, 160 Misc.2d 558 (1994) 613 N.Y.S.2d 795 THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. WILLIAM THORPE, Appellant Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department March 14, 1994 Appeal from the Justice Court of the Town of Goshen, Orange County, Richard S. Gillette, J. William Thorpe, appellant pro se. Francis D. Phillips II, District Attorney of Orange County, Goshen (John Goldsmith of counsel), for respondent. Page 559 

MEMORANDUM. Judgment of conviction reversed on the law and facts and as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, fine and surcharge remitted and simplified traffic information dismissed. In answer to the defendant's assertion in his affidavit of errors that his constitutional right to a speedy trial had been violated, the return of the court merely asserted that the right to a speedy trial did not apply to a traffic infraction. This assertion is incorrect, since the constitutional right to a speedy trial applies to all prosecutions (People v Wertheimer, NYLJ, June 5, 1986, at 15, col 5 [App Term, 2d & 11th Jud Dists]). Although a constitutional speedy trial claim is not waived by a guilty plea, it must be asserted in the court below in order to preserve the issue for appellate review as a matter of law (People v Jordan, 62 N.Y.2d 825; People v Blakely, 34 N.Y.2d 311). In view of the failure of the return to give any factual data regarding defendant's claim, it cannot be known for certain whether defendant made any motion to dismiss on this ground. Even it he did not, however, it is our opinion, in view of his pro se status, that the matter should be reviewed in the interests of justice (CPL 170.40 Crim. Proc.; People v Williams, 151 A.D.2d 795, lv denied 76 N.Y.2d 744; People v Walker, 141 A.D.2d 991, 992, lv denied 72 N.Y.2d 962). In doing so, we conclude that an unexplained delay of over two years in bringing a simple traffic infraction to trial warrants dismissal (see, People v Taranovich, 37 N.Y.2d 442). DiPAOLA, P.J., COLLINS and INGRASSIA, JJ., concur. Page 560

170.40 Crim. Proc. Motion to dismiss information, simplified traffic information, prosecutor's information or misdemeanor complaint; in furtherance of justice. 1. An information, a simplified traffic information, a prosecutor's information or a misdemeanor complaint, or any count thereof, may be dismissed in the interest of justice, as provided in paragraph (g) of subdivision one of section 170.30 when, even though there may be no basis for dismissal as a matter of law upon any ground specified in paragraphs (a) through (f) of said subdivision one of section 170.30, such dismissal is required as a matter of judicial discretion by the existence of some compelling factor, consideration or circumstance clearly demonstrating that conviction or prosecution of the defendant upon such accusatory instrument or count would constitute or result in injustice. In determining whether such compelling factor, consideration, or circumstance exists, the court must, to the extent applicable, examine and consider, individually and collectively, the following: (a) the seriousness and circumstances of the offense; (b) the extent of harm caused by the offense; (c) the evidence of guilt, whether admissible or inadmissible at trial; (d) the history, character and condition of the defendant; (e) any exceptionally serious misconduct of law enforcement personnel in the investigation, arrest and prosecution of the defendant; (f) the purpose and effect of imposing upon the defendant a sentence authorized for the offense; (g) the impact of a dismissal on the safety or welfare of the community; (h) the impact of a dismissal upon the confidence of the public in the criminal justice system; (i) where the court deems it appropriate, the attitude of the complainant or victim with respect to the motion; (j) any other relevant fact indicating that a judgment of conviction would serve no useful purpose. 2. An order dismissing an accusatory instrument specified in subdivision one in the interest of justice may be issued upon motion of the people or of the court itself as well as upon that of the defendant. Upon issuing such an order, the court must set forth its reasons therefor upon the record.

PEOPLE v. ROSENFELD, 163 Misc.2d 982 (1994)

626 N.Y.S.2d 352


Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department

December 20, 1994

Appeal from the Justice Court of the Town of Wallkill, Orange
County, Ray Shoemaker, J.

Norman Rosenfeld, appellant pro se.

Francis D. Phillips II, District Attorney of Orange County,
Goshen (Anthony R. LoBiondo of counsel), for respondent.
Page 983


Judgment of conviction unanimously reversed as a matter of
discretion in the interest of justice, simplified information
dismissed and fine remitted.

Defendant was issued a simplified traffic information which
charged him with speeding in violation of section 1180 (b) of the
Vehicle and Traffic Law. Defendant entered a plea of not guilty
and the matter was set down for trial on October 21, 1993. On
that date the information was dismissed for failure to timely
serve and file a supporting deposition. Defendant was immediately
issued a new simplified information and a supporting deposition
based on the same allegations. Following a trial thereon
defendant was found guilty. Since the record in the case at bar
fails to disclose any special circumstances, it is this court's
opinion that the court abused its discretion when it permitted
defendant to be tried based upon the new simplified information
and supporting deposition (see, People v Aucello, 146 Misc.2d 417).
Such actions, in this court's opinion, defeat the very
purpose of the CPL, disregard the interests of judicial economy
and, often times, render the defense of traffic matters
impracticable. In view of the foregoing, the judgment of
conviction should be reversed as a matter of discretion in the
interest of justice (see, CPL 470.15 [3] [c]; cf., People v
Nuccio, 78 N.Y.2d 102).

STARK, J.P., COLLINS and LUCIANO, JJ., concur.
Page 984