more efficiently while avoiding large numbers of people congregating in proximity for hours. The first thing that would have to change, albeit a slight change, is the uniform summons itself. A simple box for a checkmark could be added for the law enforcement officer to indicate whether the ticket is eligible for pre-disposition mitigation. This would be very similar to, or in lieu of, the current box that an officer can check if no appearance is necessary. If the officer checks the “pre-disposition mitigation eligible” box, that will identify to the court that the defendant was relatively polite and cooperative throughout the interaction and there were no issues to raise before the court other than what the ticket was issued for. If the law enforcement officer does not check the box for any reason, the traditionally available options would still be available and an appearance, by defendant or counsel, would be required for any potential reduction. For those tickets that are deemed eligible for pre-disposition mitigation by the officer, additional details would be provided to the defendant regarding their options. Such options could either be listed on the revised summons or mailed to those defendants whose cases are deemed eligible. The generic information would advise the defendant that they can provide certain documents (i.e., driving record, certificate of driving school completion, etc.) by a certain date prior to their court date. Upon receipt of such documents, the court could offer an early disposition by advising the defendant, based on the documents provided, how their charge will be amended to a reduced charge with a specific fine or costs, or dismissed with costs, or any other available disposition. That notice could also advise that if the defendant wishes to present any additional evidence to the court, they must appear on their given court date to do so; otherwise, they will be considered to have accepted the given disposition. This change would increase access to justice by allowing defendants who cannot hire an attorney or miss a day of work or childcare to receive the same favorable disposition as those defendants who can. While licenses are no longer suspended for fines and costs, DMV suspensions based on DMV demerit points are still common. A wealthy defendant and an indigent defendant This change would increase access to justice by allowing defendants who cannot hire an attorney or miss a day of work or childcare to receive the same favorable disposition as those defendants who can. each charged with speeding on several occasions may end up with very different driving records: appearances by the defendant or counsel could lead to dismissals or reductions to non-moving violations for a total of zero DMV demerit points, while not appearing would lead to convictions of moving violations, DMV demerit points, likely higher fines, additional costs for being tried in their absence, and the possibility of license suspension. Although this change, if enacted, would address traffic matters specifically and not more serious criminal charges, it is nevertheless essential that every defendant be afforded the same opportunities. Even though indigent defendants facing traffic charges are not afforded the right to counsel, the repercussions on their day-to-day lives can be just as substantial and severe as those associated with some criminal convictions. Finally, in the era of COVID, and likely beyond, social distancing will continue to be important. Pre-disposition mitigation would allow elderly and immuno-compromised defendants the same opportunities as others without risking their health or lives. It would also allow courts to continue processing cases, avoiding docket backlogs, and reducing courthouse crowding. The minor changes to the paperwork and processes would be easily justified considering the benefit for the issues that matter: access to justice, public health, and operation of the courts. Endnotes 1 General District Court Manual, Chapter 4: Traffic Case Procedures. Revised 7/20. http://www.courts.state.va.us/courts/ gd/resources/manuals/gdman/chapter04.pdf. Shawn Mihill, SMihill@virginialawoffice.com, is an associate at Anderson & Associates, PC in Virginia Beach. A graduate of Wake Forest University School of Law, his practice consists of criminal defense and civil litigation in courts throughout the Commonwealth. www.vsb.org THE HEALTH LAW ISSUE | VOL. 69 | FEBRUARY 2021 | VIRGINIA LAWYER 27