Author Archives: admin

MO Gov. signs bill reforming municipal courts, policing, tickets

Missouri’s Gov. Jay Nixon this week signed a municipal court reform bill that serves to limit court revenue from traffic related tickets. The bill is a response to the troubles related to Ferguson where a large section of North County’s poor population were being subjected to what many have called predatory practices.

The bill goes into effect Aug. 28, but municipalities have three to six years to comply with some provisions. The bill is designed to restore trust between communities and their local governments and police agencies. Municipal courts in St. Louis County generated more than $52 million in 2014.

The legislation prohibits failure to appear charges for missing a court date, reduces certain fines, and bans jail as a sentence for most minor traffic offenses. Part of the bill limits how much of a cities’ general operating revenue can be collected from court fines and fees.

Cities will soon be required to provide financial reports annually to the state auditor. Each municipal judge then must certify that the court is complying with required procedures.

Addressing concerns on the law enforcement side of the reform, police departments must seek accreditation, along with developing written policies on use of force and pursuit of suspects. Finally, all city ordinances will have to be made available to the public. The Missouri Supreme court has been required to review and overhaul its ethical rules of conflicts of interest in the court system.

In March, a U.S. Department of Justice report criticized Ferguson police and courts, saying that they operated with the primary goal of maximizing revenue instead of meting out justice and protecting the rights of the accused.

The way the state’s court systems are designed, allows for people who can afford lawyers to get their tickets amended to minor infractions, while others in power allegedly can call in favors to get cases dismissed. Meanwhile, the poor are sometimes jailed if they miss court or can’t afford to pay.

The Ferguson Commission, created last year after Ferguson protests, sees these reforms as first steps, according to its co-chaired Rich McClure. The commission has been researching and debating plans to make other recommendations.

Some recommendations include recalling around 490,000 existing warrants that have been issued in St. Louis County for failing to appear, treating minor ordinance violations as civil violations and having the Missouri Supreme Court consolidate the area’s 81 municipal courts. These recommendations will soon be passed on with the advisory that many of them were strongly disagreed upon by members of the commission.

Nixon signed the bill at the Eastern Court of Appeals in the Old Post Office Building in St. Louis. The campaign to reform the courts gained traction after the fatal shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson last August and many months of protesting throughout the St. Louis Metropolitan area.

Lawsuit tackles bond and jailing policies in City of St. Ann

A local legal defense organization has sued the City of St. Ann for jailing poor defendants because they cannot pay their bond.

The lawsuit, brought by ArchCity Defenders and Washington-based Equal Justice Under Law, was filed this week in federal court and seeks class action status.

If defendants cannot pay bond amounts ranging between $150 to $350, they have to spend several days in jail, the suit alleges. It further states that St. Ann does not release people on their own recognizance or with an unsecured bond – an allegation the city has denied.

The lawsuit was filed on behalf of Kellen Powell. Powell was arrested in St. Ann after being pulled over for allegedly failing to display a license plate and driving with a suspended license. The suit states that Powell was told to pay $300 to be released or he would have to stay a week in jail. At the time, Powell was working a job that paid him very little.

As of September 2014, St. Ann had more than 14,000 outstanding warrants, yet its population is only 13,000 residents. The city had filed over 28,000 ordinance violations in 2013.

ArchCity Defenders recently filed a similar suit in nearby Velda City, and federal lawsuits in Ferguson and Jennings alleging that they were run like debtors prisons. Several other suits have been filed against nine other St. Louis County municipals.

Consolidate St. Louis municipals, says new study

A new study of St. Louis municipals calls for a consolidation of 18 cities in the North County region. The study, commissioned by a local nonprofit Better Together, proposes that these select cities should centralize their police enforcement, training, communications, data collection, and oversight. At the same time, the report acknowledges that political opposition to consolidation is likely to harm progress and cooperation already underway among many of the cities. The report comes at time when the state legislature is debating a cap of 15 percent on the amount of a municipals’ revenue that can be generated from traffic ticket violations.

Consolidating police services in north St. Louis County will save money but politically would be difficult, a new research report says.

A Washington-based consulting group, Police Executive Research Forum, issued its findings Monday, according to a news report by the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. The report recommends centralized training, communications, data collection, and oversight for the St. Louis metropolitan area.

Specifically, the report calls for 18 municipal police departments in north St. Louis County to consolidate.

The report, called “Overcoming the Challenges and Creating a Regional Approach to Policing in St. Louis City and County,” points out that there is a duplication of services and costs that can be better managed and saved by working towards consolidation.

The report added that attempts towards changing current police structures is likely to be met with strong community opposition, possibly undermining cooperation that already exists between governments.

The report proposed three major consolidations: The University City Police Department should take over services for Pagedale, Pine Lawn, Uplands Park, Velda City, Beverly Hills, Hillsdale, Northwoods, Velda Village Hills and Wellston.

St. Louis County Police would serve the municipals of Berkeley, Calverton Park, Ferguson and Kinloch, while Bellefontaine Neighbors, Country Club Hills, Flordell Hills, Moline Acres and Riverview could be folded into the county police department’s Jennings precinct.

The report was commissioned by Better Together, a St. Louis-based nonprofit studying possible benefits of regional cooperation.

The report’s release comes at a time when the state legislature began debating a bill in Jefferson City that would cap the percentage of revenue that municipals could generate from ticket revenues.

The proposed bill states that fines from minor traffic violations could produce no more than 15 percent of a city’s operating revenue in St. Louis County. The rest of the state, however, would have a 20 percent revenue cap on ticket revenue.. The new caps would start Jan. 1, 2016.

The bill, currently in the Senate, needs another committee’s approval before moving to the House floor. Under the House version, people who miss court dates would no longer face additional charges. Failure to appear fines can run from $75.00 or more in some municipals.

Those with minor traffic charges would not have to pay more than $200.00 in combined fine and court costs.

Minor traffic violations include those not involving commercial motor vehicles, accidents or injuries, and which result in four points or less assessed against a person’s driver’s license. Exceptions to minor traffic violations would include exceeding the speed limit by more than 19 miles per hour or violating traffic laws in a construction or school zones.

Missouri Senate passes municipal court reform bill

The Missouri Senate came to a compromise this week on the amount they will allow municipals to generate from traffic ticket fines. However, a constitutional challenge is already being talked because the bill treats St. Louis County different from the rest of the state. The bill also eliminates failure to appear court fees, establishes payment plans, and limits the amount of time a person can be held after arrest with and without a warrant.

Compromise made in Municipal Court Bill
Revenue cap from tickets set at 12.5 percent for St. Louis County

The Missouri Legislature compromised this Wednesday on a bill that sets limits on how much revenue municipals can generate from traffic tickets.

The new deal worked out drops the original proposed cap to 12.5 percent, down from 15 percent, for cities in St. Louis County. The cap, originally set at 30 percent of general operating revenue statewide, calls for a new 20 percent limit for the rest of the state.

The Senate voted 31-3 to pass the bill Wednesday night. The House is expected to vote on a bill this week and send it to Gov. Jay Nixon.

The bill is a response to the killing of Michael Brown, an unarmed black teen, by a white police officer last August. Because the bill treats St. Louis County different from the rest of the state, some legislators believe it may be unconstitutional and likely challenged in court.

The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports that more than a third of the county’s 90 cities appear to receive over 12 percent of their budgets from overall court fines and fees. Since the bill alters the definition of traffic revenue and operating revenue, it is difficult to determine which cities are affected.

Failure to appear fines

The bill also prevents cities from charging failure to appear in court fines. The fines, which could run from $75 or higher, quickly racked up costs on defendants and disincentivized them from taking care of their warrants and tickets altogether.

Safety Concerns

Some argue that eliminating revenue stream from traffic ticket could result in a cutback of police presence on roads, and hence a greater number of traffic accidents and deaths.

Enforcement

If it is determined that a cities’ ticket revenue exceeds the cap, the bill allows the state to intercept a city’s sales tax revenue if the city refuses to turn over any excess ticket revenue. That money would go to schools in the county where the city was located. The bill calls for a question to be placed on the ballot, asking local voters if they wanted to disincorporate the city.

Openness of process

Some cities have been known for holding proceedings in secret. Under this bill municipals would be required to hold court proceedings in courtrooms open and large enough to accommodate the public and those involved in cases.

Holdover time & payment plans

Individuals arrested on a traffic warrant involving a minor violation cannot be held longer than 48 hours under this bill, while a person arrested without a warrant cannot be held for more than 24 hours. Courts would have to provide for alternative payment plans and community service sentences.

Make sure your attorney knows the law.

In Missouri there in no constitutional right under Missouri Implied Consent law to speak with an attorney, but there is a limited right to seek the advice of an attorney. If you request to speak with an attorney, the officer is required to give you 20 minutes within which to contact one. This applies either before or after you are given the Implied Consent Warning. If you are not given 20 minutes without abandoning your search, the breath or blood results are inadmissible.

The Western District recently handed down an opinion regarding this issue in Sless Shaleen Riley vs. Director of Revenue, WD73956. In Riley vs. DOR, Riley requested to speak with an attorney several times but did not reaffirm her request after the Implied Consent Warning was read to her. The officer did not permit her to consult with an attorney and had her blood tested for alcohol.  The court found that the BAC results from the blood test would have been inadmissible but for the fact that her attorney did not object to the admission of the results on any basis. Once evidence is properly admitted it can be used for any purpose. The objection has to be made to keep evidence out.

Bel-Nor Traffic Court Information

Located in St. Louis County

Bel-Nor Municipal Court
Rosie Ballentine, Court Clerk
8416 Natural Bridge
St. Louis County, MO 63121
(314) 381-2834
(314) 381-2263 (facsimile)

Municipal Judge
Hon. Sean J. O’Hagan

Prosecuting Attorney
Stephanie Karr, Esq.
Court Dates and Docket Dates
1st Wednesday of every month at 6:00 pm

Hours
The Violations Bureau is open for payments on Monday Wednesday, and Friday from 8 a.m. to 4:00pm.

In 2012, the Municipality of Bel-Nor filed over 800 tickets. Did you get a ticket in the municipality of Bel-Nor? What should you do?

If you received a moving violation you have 3 options:

  1. Pay it
  2. Go to court and try to fight it yourself
  3. Hire an attorney.

If you pay it, there will be points assessed to your license. This can cause your insurance rates to go up and/or cause your license to be suspended. Eight points in 18 months can result in a license suspension.

If you try to fight it yourself, the first time you appear in court, your case will not be heard. You will be required to wait and then stand in front of the judge to plead guilty or not guilty. If you plead not guilty, the judge will set your case for trial and you will have to come back at another date. Taking care of the ticket yourself will result in at least two court appearances taking upwards of an hour a piece. Then if you lose, you will be required to pay the fine anyway.

If you hire an attorney, you will likely avoid the appearance and our goal is to get your moving violation amended to a non-moving violation. We have worked in the Bel-Nor Municipal for over 10 years. We work with the prosecuting attorney to get your ticket reduced. We then notify you via email and hard copy and all you have to do is mail in your payment. Usually this process requires no appearance in court on your part saving you time and energy. For a free consultation, fill out our easy ticket submission form and one of our attorneys will contact you.

Bel-Nor MIP Defense

    • Our Bel-Nor MIP lawyers handle MIP defense, where the object is keeping your record clean and your driver license from being suspended

Bel-Nor DWI Defense

  • Our Bel-Nor DWI attorneys handle drunk driving defense, where your driver license and your freedom are at stake.

Let our Bel-Nor Traffic Lawyers start helping you today. Contact Us

Bel-Nor Traffic Court Information

This page contains Court information Links for Bel-Nor, Missouri.

 

 

 

Bel-Nor, MO Speeding Ticket Lawyers

MO Speeding Ticket Lawyers | MO DWI Lawyers | MO MIP Lawyers

Bel-Nor, MO MIP Lawyers

Complete List of all Missouri SATOP OMU’s with Links

Bel-Nor, MO DWI Lawyers


Missouri Speeding Ticket Defense | Missouri MIP Defense | Missouri DWI Defense

The Missouri Point System Statute – RSMo 302.302

Effective 8/28/10

Point system–assessment for violation–assessment of points stayed, when, procedure.

302.302. 1. The director of revenue shall put into effect a point system for the suspension and revocation of licenses. Points shall be assessed only after a conviction or forfeiture of collateral. The initial point value is as follows:

(1) Any moving violation of a state law or county or municipal or federal traffic ordinance or regulation not listed in this section, other than a violation of vehicle equipment provisions or a court-ordered supervision as provided in section 302.303 2 points
(except any violation of municipal stop sign ordinance where no accident is involved) 1 point
(2) Speeding In violation of a state law 3 points
In violation of a county or municipal ordinance 2 points
(3) Leaving the scene of an accident in violation of section 577.060, RSMo 12 points
In violation of any county or municipal ordinance 6 points
(4) Careless and imprudent driving in violation of subsection 4 of section 304.016, RSMo 4 points
In violation of a county or municipal ordinance 2 points
(5) Operating without a valid license in violation of subdivision (1) or (2) of subsection 1 of section 302.020
(a) For the first conviction 2 points
(b) For the second conviction 4 points
(c) For the third conviction 6 points
(6) Operating with a suspended or revoked license prior to restoration of operating privileges 12 points
(7) Obtaining a license by misrepresentation 12 points
(8) For the first conviction of driving while in an intoxicated condition or under the influence of controlled substances or drugs 8 points
(9) For the second or subsequent conviction of any of the following offenses however combined: driving while in an intoxicated condition, driving under the influence of controlled substances or drugs or driving with a blood alcohol content of eight-hundredths of one percent or more by weight 12 points
(10) For the first conviction for driving with blood alcohol content eight-hundredths of one percent or more by weight In violation of state law 8 points
In violation of a county or municipal ordinance or federal law or regulation 8 points
(11) Any felony involving the use of a motor vehicle 12 points
(12) Knowingly permitting unlicensed operator to operate a motor vehicle 4 points
(13) For a conviction for failure to maintain financial responsibility pursuant to county or municipal ordinance or pursuant to section 303.025, RSMo 4 points
(14) Endangerment of a highway worker in violation of section 304.585, RSMo 4 points
(15) Aggravated endangerment of a highway worker in violation of section 304.585, RSMo 12 points
(16) For a conviction of violating a municipal ordinance that prohibits tow truck operators from stopping at or proceeding to the scene of an accident unless they have been requested to stop or proceed to such scene by a party involved in such accident or by an officer of a public safety agency 4 points

2. The director shall, as provided in subdivision (5) of subsection 1 of this section, assess an operator points for a conviction pursuant to subdivision (1) or (2) of subsection 1 of section 302.020, when the director issues such operator a license or permit pursuant to the provisions of sections 302.010 to 302.340.

3. An additional two points shall be assessed when personal injury or property damage results from any violation listed in subdivisions (1) to (13) of subsection 1 of this section and if found to be warranted and certified by the reporting court.

4. When any of the acts listed in subdivision (2), (3), (4) or (8) of subsection 1 of this section constitutes both a violation of a state law and a violation of a county or municipal ordinance, points may be assessed for either violation but not for both. Notwithstanding that an offense arising out of the same occurrence could be construed to be a violation of subdivisions (8), (9) and (10) of subsection 1 of this section, no person shall be tried or convicted for more than one offense pursuant to subdivisions (8), (9) and (10) of subsection 1 of this section for offenses arising out of the same occurrence.

5. The director of revenue shall put into effect a system for staying the assessment of points against an operator. The system shall provide that the satisfactory completion of a driver-improvement program or, in the case of violations committed while operating a motorcycle, a motorcycle-rider training course approved by the state highways and transportation commission, by an operator, when so ordered and verified by any court having jurisdiction over any law of this state or county or municipal ordinance, regulating motor vehicles, other than a violation committed in a commercial motor vehicle as defined in section 302.700 or a violation committed by an individual who has been issued a commercial driver’s license or is required to obtain a commercial driver’s license in this state or any other state, shall be accepted by the director in lieu of the assessment of points for a violation pursuant to subdivision (1), (2) or (4) of subsection 1 of this section or pursuant to subsection 3 of this section. For the purposes of this subsection, the driver-improvement program shall meet or exceed the standards of the National Safety Council’s eight-hour “Defensive Driving Course” or, in the case of a violation which occurred during the operation of a motorcycle, the program shall meet the standards established by the state highways and transportation commission pursuant to sections 302.133 to 302.137. The completion of a driver-improvement program or a motorcycle-rider training course shall not be accepted in lieu of points more than one time in any thirty-six-month period and shall be completed within sixty days of the date of conviction in order to be accepted in lieu of the assessment of points. Every court having jurisdiction pursuant to the provisions of this subsection shall, within fifteen days after completion of the driver-improvement program or motorcycle-rider training course by an operator, forward a record of the completion to the director, all other provisions of the law to the contrary notwithstanding. The director shall establish procedures for record keeping and the administration of this subsection.

View Missouri Department of Revenue’s FAQ about Tickets and Points

Missouri Traffic Points Overview

Missouri uses a Point System for to determine the suspension and revocation of driver licenses privileges in the State of Missouri.

Below is an overview of the Missouri Point System and answers our most frequently asked “Points” questions:

  • How many points will be assessed against your license if you just pay the fine and plead guilty to a moving violation?
  • How long the points will stay on your license?
  • How many points it takes before your license is suspended or revoked?

Missouri Driver License Point System

The Department of Revenue adds points to your record when it receives notice that you were convicted of a moving violation (a traffic violation while your vehicle was in motion). As experienced traffic law defense attorneys, we keep points from being assessed against our clients’ licenses day in and day out.

The number of points you receive for a conviction depends what type of moving violation resulted in the conviction. For example, a conviction for speeding in violation of a municipal ordinance will result in 2 points being added to your license. However, a conviction for speeding in violation of state law will result in 3 points being added to your license.

A conviction for leaving the scene of an accident in violation of state law will result in 12 points being added to (and the immediate suspension of) your license.

The following are some examples of some state law violations and their point values:

VIOLATION POINT VALUE
Speeding 3 points
Careless & Imprudent Driving 4 points
Knowingly Allowing an Unlicensed Driver to Drive 4 points
A Felony Involving a Motor Vehicle 12 points
Obtaining a Driver License by Misrepresentation 12 points
Operating a Vehicle While Suspended or Revoked 12 points

Missouri Driver License Point Suspension and Revocation

Point Accumulation Advisory Letter – 4 Points in 12 Months.
If you accumulate 4 points in 12 months, the Dept. of Revenue will send you a point accumulation advisory.

Suspension – 8 Points in 18 Months.
If you accumulate 8 or more points in 18 months, the Dept. of Revenue will suspend your driving privilege.

  • 1st suspension – 30 days
  • 2nd suspension – 60 days
  • 3rd or more suspensions – 90 days

Revocation
If you accumulate 12 or more points in 12 months, 18 or more points in 24 months or 24 or more points in 36 months, the Dept. of Revenue will revoke your driving privilege for one year.

  • 12 or more points in 12 months.
  • 18 or more points in 24 months.
  • 24 or more points in 36 months.

Missouri Driver License Reinstatement

To reinstate your driving privilege for a point suspension or revocation you must provide the following:

  • Non-alcohol related: Proof of insurance (SR-22) and $20 reinstatement fee.
  • Alcohol related: Proof of insurance (SR-22), $45 reinstatement fee and completion of SATOP.

Missouri Driver License Point Reduction

When your driving privilege is reinstated, the Department of Revenue reduces your total points to 4. Every year you drive without getting new points on your record, the points will be reduced:

  • 1 year – total remaining points reduced by one-third
  • 2 years – remaining points reduced by one-half
  • 3 years – points reduced to zero

Though your points may be reduced to zero, certain most convictions may remain listed permanently on your Missouri driver record.

Missouri SATOP Locations

Click on your County to see SATOP providers near you.

Please bear with us while we update this page.

Adair Andrew Audrain Barry
Bates Benton Boone Buchanan
Butler Callaway Camden Cape Girardeau
Cass Cedar Christian Clark
Clay Clinton Cole Cooper
Crawford Dade Dallas Dent
Douglas Dunklin Franklin Greene
Grundy Henry Hickory Howard
Howell Iron Jackson Jasper
Jefferson Johnson Knox Laclede
Lafayette Lawrence Lewis Lincoln
Linn Livingston Macon Madison
Maries Marion McDonald Mercer
Miller Mississippi Moniteau Monroe
Montgomery Morgan New Madrid Newton
Nodaway Oregon Osage Ozark
Pemiscot Perry Pettis Phelps
Pike Platte Polk Pulaski
Putnam Ralls Randolph Ray
Reynolds Ripley Saline Schuyler
Scott Scotland Shannon Shelby
St. Charles St. Clair St. Francois St. Louis City
St. Louis County Ste. Genevieve Stoddard Stone
Sullivan Taney Texas Vernon
Warren Washington Wayne Webster
Worth Wright

Wright County SATOP

Mountain Grove

Community Services of Missouri, Inc.  (417) 926-4409
1902 W. 19th St., Suite B
Mountain Grove, MO 65711