There is an ancient maxim of the law that states ignorantia juris non excusat, or “ignorance of the law does not excuse.”
… BOTH of these judges should be judicially disrobed, disbarred, and publicly castrated (no, I really didn’t mean to say castigated)…
… it allows… the officer AND the prosecutor to… decide… what legally constitutes “evading/evasion” in order to charge and prosecute…
“Nothing is unchangeable but the inherent and unalienable rights of man.” –Thomas Jefferson to John Cartwright, 1824. ME 16:48
It is axiomatic that, as a general rule, most reasonable and intelligent people already believe that the vast majority of attorneys are scumbags, liars and thieves, and rightly so.
SB 971 created an entirely new form of license TERMINOLOGY (driver’s license), BUT, it DID NOT actually create ANY new form of license, it was only made to APPEAR that it had done so.
How Can a Statute be “Enlarged” by Adding Something not Written and Still Avoid Being Unconstitutionally Vague, Ambiguous, and Over-broad?
Therefore, when a prosecutor objects on the grounds that “the officer isn’t required to know that,” they are actually admitting that their witness is legally and factually incompetent to testify to those facts because they lack personal knowledge, and would be both committing perjury and violating the admissibility and hearsay rules by answering.
If you wanted to survive the Colosseum as a gladiator, you had to learn how to be the best and most awesomely skilled gladiator you could be.