Thank you for your question.

Go to law school.

Along that journey, you will learn that "legal authority" on *state law* matters is merely *persuasive* and anything but "controlling", even if the two state's specific laws at play and their constitutions are word-for-word identical.

There are also issues of the *scope* of cross-examination, relevance of information, prosecutorial discretion and pre-trial disclosures, including "Brady disclosures" by the prosecution that can strengthen or eliminate a defendant's ability to present evidence at trial. One key principle is that if something is not properly taken care of before trial, it just might be *properly* excluded from evidence.

Traffic laws like speeding also do not carry any "specific" intent, instead being "strict liability" offenses.

So, I always recommend that if someone wants to play in the courtroom, they should research as much of the relevant local state law and court rules and case law as they have time to *before* any of the deadlines for various filings pass.

You now come to this site asking what you should do. There is a whole list of what is and is not allowed in our Terms of Service here, and the short version is that we answer legal questions, as in about what the law is or how it works, but we cannot give personal legal advice. The only legal advice that is allowed here is the same as the only legal advice attorneys can give to residents of other states seeking legal representation in those states where the attorney is not licensed: you should get your own attorney to give you legal advice.

As a bonus bit if information, please know that an appeal is usually directed towards getting a new trial because the judge made an "error of law" in how the trial was run. It is not just to try to get a second chance to try a case only because the result was unfavorable. Then even if an error or irregularity is identified, the appellant must also show that the error resulted in the outcome complained of. Appealing on "harmless error" factors like admitting one smidgen of improper hearsay evidence in the face of mountains of OTHER evidence of guilt is, for example, likely to fall into the "harmless error" reason for an appeals court to let a prior judgment stand.

You are truly faced with a personal decision of whether the battle you contemplate is a hill worth dying on. Unfortunately, even if personal legal advice were allowed here, it cannot reasonably or ethically be given in a post-conviction setting without first reviewing the trial record, and that takes a LOT of time.

Thank you.

BAB.