Why Hire a Traffic Lawyer? Accidents.

I was making small talk with another lawyer the other night. We were discussing the kind of work we do. She had clerked for the Court of Appeals (the highest court in NY) and now is employed by a very fancy law firm, where she is an associate in the medical malpractice department. In contrast, I worked as a carpenter nearly full time when I went to a law school and other than a stint for a firm, I have been a solo practitioner handling mostly traffic and DWI cases. I was feeling, well let's say a little low class, but we ended up having a lengthy and very interesting conversation.

At one point the lawyer told me about the one traffic case she handled and how she felt bad for the client because she could not get him a deal, and he paid a grand for the service. The client was a doctor who was ticketed for allegedly "failing to yield the right of way" resulting in a minor personal injury accident. The prosecutor offered to "reduce" the charge to a "failure to obey a traffic control device" or NY VTL 1110(A). The lawyer said she took the "deal" because if her client was convicted of the failure to yield right of way offense, the conviction would be offered as evidence against him at a personal injury trial. I'm still confused why this lawyer thought that a guilty plea to the 1110(a) charge would be any different. The 1110(a) is a moving violation that carries two points. In my opinion, this lawyer essentially pled her client guilty to the charge. In any case, if the offer is plead to the charge, there is no offer and you have nothing to lose by going to trial, and something to gain by the chance of winning the trial.

In the case of this doctor and the accident, the cop who wrote the ticket did not see the accident himself. Unless the cop is an accident reconstruction expert, he can't testify about something he did not see. The burden is on the people at trial to establish a prima facie case and without a witness testifying from personal knowledge, that will be tough. Maybe the people have witnesses who saw the accident. Well if it's the people in the other car, and they are there to testify, why not at least cross examine them? They are probably biased and have a motive to lie.

I believe there is a general notion that any attorney can handle a traffic case, and it is generally true that any moderately competent attorney can negotiate as decent plea bargain. However, it does not follow that such an attorney will have the skills to actually defend a traffic defendant. That is because a real traffic attorney is a trial lawyer first. There are traffic lawyers who are excellent deal makers but when the chips are down, they will plead a client guilty to the charge because they do not know how to fight.