While I was driving, I needed to stop somewhere and I stopped in a shoulder. Then, a police officer came and gave me misdemeanor summons for trespassing on a park. I came to know that this is a public park area and there is such a rule that it is not allowed to enter after sunset, which is written in a wooden signboard not visible at dark.
When I went to court, I talked to the prosecutor and she said there is always a chance that judge may find it guilty. She said she will dismiss the case if I pay and do contribution to criminal laboratory. I got a paper titled recommendation and reassignment for status. It is written that court reassigns this matter to the court status docket for appearance by the defendant and, if the condition is performed the case will be dismissed. Otherwise, case will be set for trial with original charge. And they gave me another date for status trial hearing. In the affidavit I got, the charge is written as trespassing on a park 12:270. I also saw the police report and nothing extra was written.
I would go and say not guilty. And, most probably it will be dismissed. My first question is whether this agreement with the persecutor was a good idea or not?
Does it mean I plead guilty - or not guilty?
What does status docket mean? Also, the next date is for status trial hearing – what does it mean?
The second concern is how does it look in my history now? And, how will it look later after dismissal? Is there any difference if it has been dismissed in the beginning?
The prosecutor also told me to file a motion for expungement to keep it off from my records. The most confusing part was this since she said it will be dismissed. Later I learned that expungement is for the arrest record and even there is no arrest summons looks as an arrest in the history.
It is still not clear for me why do I need expungement. Is it bad or good though I don't know whether it will be really removed? It is a simple case and some expungement in my records may create some doubts.
I don't know how it looks in background checks or other immigration history checks. I am really confused about it. I don't understand why it is so complicated for such a small matter. Any comment is appreciated. Would it be better if I go on and say not guilty instead of making this agreement? Will there be any drawbacks? Thanks.
When I went to court, I talked to the prosecutor and she said there is always a chance that judge may find it guilty. She said she will dismiss the case if I pay and do contribution to criminal laboratory. I got a paper titled recommendation and reassignment for status. It is written that court reassigns this matter to the court status docket for appearance by the defendant and, if the condition is performed the case will be dismissed. Otherwise, case will be set for trial with original charge. And they gave me another date for status trial hearing. In the affidavit I got, the charge is written as trespassing on a park 12:270. I also saw the police report and nothing extra was written.
I would go and say not guilty. And, most probably it will be dismissed. My first question is whether this agreement with the persecutor was a good idea or not?
Does it mean I plead guilty - or not guilty?
What does status docket mean? Also, the next date is for status trial hearing – what does it mean?
The second concern is how does it look in my history now? And, how will it look later after dismissal? Is there any difference if it has been dismissed in the beginning?
The prosecutor also told me to file a motion for expungement to keep it off from my records. The most confusing part was this since she said it will be dismissed. Later I learned that expungement is for the arrest record and even there is no arrest summons looks as an arrest in the history.
It is still not clear for me why do I need expungement. Is it bad or good though I don't know whether it will be really removed? It is a simple case and some expungement in my records may create some doubts.
I don't know how it looks in background checks or other immigration history checks. I am really confused about it. I don't understand why it is so complicated for such a small matter. Any comment is appreciated. Would it be better if I go on and say not guilty instead of making this agreement? Will there be any drawbacks? Thanks.
