The Aggravated Unlicensed Operation criminal charge is often a surprise to most people. It is the result of having an underlying problem with your driver’s license or privilege that you probably don’t know exists. Many people who move (change apartment / house / roommate) frequently can lose or misplace their mail. If the DMV has sent you a notice of an unpaid or pending fine, this will result in the suspension of your privilege to drive in New York State.
If you are stopped for a speeding ticket, moving violation, or equipment violation, the officer will review your license. If your license is suspended, revoked, or shows outstanding unresolved issues, you can write one or two fines for the following charges: AUO 3rd (Aggravated Operation Without License in the Third Degree) in violation of the Traffic and Vehicle Act, section 511 (1 ) (a), a class A misdemeanor (a felony) and Unlicensed Operator in violation of Section 509 of the Traffic and Vehicle Act, which is simply a Traffic Offense. Understanding the fundamental differences between these two charges is critical to your defense.
The expression “the proof is in the pudding” has been around for hundreds of years. It is a metaphor that means “to believe only in the things that can be proven”. Jurors should never make assumptions or believe what they are told without something else. That something else is making the facts apply to a clearly defined law and set of rules.
Every criminal charge has things (called items) that must be proven. The jury acts as a “fact finder” in this role. They are given the law and the rules of evidence that the judge must apply to this set of facts.
What the judge must provide the jury with is a set or sets of instructions. The determination of guilty or not guilty of a criminal charge depends on the jury’s understanding and application of the jury’s instructions for that specific charge.
Various criminal charges have different sets of instructions that the jury must follow. The criminal charge of aggravated operation without a license of a motor vehicle in the third degree, a class A misdemeanor has a mental state of knowledge included within the jury’s instruction.
The jury’s instruction is as follows:
In order for you (the Jury) to find the defendant (the defendant) guilty of this crime, the People (the Prosecutor’s Office / Government) must prove, from all the evidence in the case beyond a reasonable doubt, each of the following two items:
1. That on or about that date, in the county of (county), the defendant operated a motor vehicle on a public highway; Y
2. That the defendant did it knowing or having reason to know have your license or privilege to operate said motor vehicle in this state or the privilege of obtaining a license to operate said motor vehicle issued by the commissioner be suspended, revoked or otherwise withdrawn by the commissioner.
Therefore, if you find that the People (the Prosecutor’s Office / the Government) have proven beyond a reasonable doubt Both elements, you must find the defendant guilty of Aggravated Operation without a License of a Motor Vehicle in the Third Degree as charged.
On the other hand, if you find that the People (the Prosecutor’s Office / the Government) have not proven beyond a reasonable doubt one or both of those items, you must find the defendant not guilty of Aggravated Operation Without a License of a Motor Vehicle in the Third Degree as charged.
The crucial element that the Prosecutor must prove is that you had knowledge that your license or privilege was suspended, revoked or withdrawn.
The key question for any third AUO case is usually:
Did you know or have any reason to know that you were driving without a license or privilege?
In contrast to AUO 3rd and your state of mind is the Unlicensed Operator Section 509 traffic violation, which simply requires you to drive (operate) with a suspended license. This is with or without knowledge of the suspension. If you drove and your license was suspended, revoked or lost your privilege, you are legally guilty of Operating Without a License which carries a small fine ($ 40 to $ 80) and a mandatory New York State surcharge. Compare this to the possible penalties for a 3rd AUO that carries a fine range of $ 200 to $ 500, a mandatory New York State surcharge, and jail time of up to 30 days (although jail is an unlikely sentence for most offenders).
To demonstrate your knowledge in a third AUO case, there are several ways the prosecution can prove your case, all of which depend on the facts. In one scenario, if you lost your driving privileges in New York or if your license was taken away by a judge at a DMV hearing or in court, it will be difficult to argue that you did not know that you did not have a license or permit to drive a car. .
On the other hand, if there is evidence (you changed your address, you had problems with the mail, you met all outstanding fines) that you never received any notice (a letter) from the New York Court or DMV of a license suspension due to an unpaid fine, an unpaid fine, or failure to pay a reactivation fee, then the Jury could view that as a reasonable doubt of your knowledge of your lack of legal privilege to drive. The core case addressing the NOTICE requirement of an AUO charge is People v. Pacer, (2006 NY Slip Op 02291).
That argument (lack of NOTICE), ie. you did not have a good reason to know, it may be accepted by a jury as a “common sense” question of your lack of knowledge or of having reason to know about your license suspension.
Ultimately, the evidence in each case depends on what can be shown to the jury. Criminal defense attorneys not only work with the facts that are visible, but they look for the invisible but discoverable facts that can help in a client’s case. The objective is to show that the facts presented by the prosecution are confusing, contradictory and do not prove the elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. Jurors must show themselves common sense reasons for finding doubts within the government test. After all, remember that it is always the government’s burden in every criminal case, not yours, to prove every element of your legal guilt to the level beyond a reasonable doubt.
