Dragomir

People v. Dragomir

Good Law
39 Cal. Rptr. 3d 164
Supreme Court of CaliforniaNovember 7, 20051-04-AP-000144California1,074 words

Opinion

Opinion

Certified for Partial Publication. [*]

BRIAN C. WALSH, Judge.

Appellant Alin T. Dragomir was cited for speeding. He requested a trial. At trial, where neither appellant nor the respondent was represented by counsel, both the citing officer and appellant testified. After appellant presented his testimony, the court, over appellant's objection, allowed the officer to cross-examine appellant. Appellant was convicted of speeding and was fined.

In the published portion of this opinion, we agree with appellant that it was error for the trial court to allow him to be cross-examined by the officer, whose only proper role was as a witness. However, appellant's conviction is affirmed because he has failed to show that he was prejudiced by the error.

The following evidence was presented through the trial testimony of California Highway Patrol Officer Atkins, the sole witness for the People, who were not represented by a prosecutor. On August 24, 2003, Officer Atkins was on duty, driving a marked patrol vehicle. She was headed northbound on Highway 17 toward Highway 85 in Santa Clara County when she observed appellant's vehicle ahead of her in lane No. three of four lanes. The traffic was…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.