A citation from an inspection: what the DataQs request needs, and what happens while the case is open

Prepare your request: evidence checklist

• Required for the adjudicated-citation request: inspection report number, event State and date, citation number and associated violation codes, and access to certified court-disposition records (Analyst Guide §5.5, p. 41).
• Supply verifiable certified court documents or a direct official court-results link that shows the final outcome and any fine or punitive court costs. Ask that the outcome be recorded for the identified associated violations; do not infer the outcome of other charges.
• Recommended by the Guide: copies of the inspection report and citation, and a clear explanation connecting each violation to the adjudicated citation. A pending case or an incomplete disposition is not evidence of a final outcome.

RoadsideProof's automated citation check looks for the citation and court disposition. That intake list is separate from the official required fields and recommended supporting records above; it does not determine the agency's decision.

Next: submit the evidence with your own DataQs request, then track it and answer requests for more information. For State requests, use the deadlines guide to check the applicable review stage and response window.

• DataQs deadlines and review stages

The request type

FMCSA's DataQs Analyst Guide: "The filer chooses this option because he/she will provide documentation showing the adjudicated outcome of a citation associated with a violation cited on a roadside inspection report." (§4.12, p. 25).

Section 5 of the guide says: "If the RDR is filed with certified documentation, the results of the adjudication process will be documented in MCMIS, and, in turn, may impact the use of roadside violation data in other FMCSA data systems, such as SMS and PSP." (p. 39).

What counts as a citation

"Citation is a notice issued by a law enforcement officer to a CMV operator charging a violation of State law or State-adopted FMCSR(s)." (§5.4, p. 40).

"A warning is not a citation; therefore, a warning issued to a commercial vehicle driver as a result of a roadside inspection is not subject to this process." (p. 40).

"Adjudicated citation means a citation that has been contested and resolved through a due process proceeding in a State, local, or administrative tribunal, regardless of how the action is resolved, whether by a judge, administrative tribunal, prosecutor, or as part of a plea agreement or otherwise." (p. 40).

What the request must contain

"The DataQs system requires the RDR to include the following mandatory information:" (§5.5, p. 41).

• "Inspection report number, event State, and date of inspection. The report number can be found on the carrier profile report, SMS results, and the driver's PSP report, for example." (p. 41).
• "Citation number and associated violation(s) codes on the inspection report." (p. 41).
• "Access to/copies of certified court record regarding disposition of the citation." (p. 41).

What the guide recommends adding

"It is recommended that the requestor also provide:" (p. 41).

• "A copy of the roadside inspection report." (p. 41).
• "A copy of the citation." (p. 41).
• "A clear explanation of the violations believed to be covered by, or related to, the adjudicated citation." (p. 41).

The court documents

"An RDR must be submitted with verifiable documentation that clearly and unambiguously demonstrates that a citation associated with a roadside inspection violation was adjudicated as defined by 49 CFR 383.5 and 390.5." (§5.5, p. 40).

The guide names two forms: "Scanned copies of certified documentation from the appropriate court or administrative tribunal" and "A website address, which links directly to the adjudication results of an official court or agency website." (p. 40).

"Verifiable documents are those recognized as originating from a court or other judicial proceeding, and can be validated by the DataQs analyst if there is a need to check with the issuing authority." (p. 41).

In one of the guide's case studies the requestor uploaded "a computerized printout of citation information from the District Court of Maryland Traffic System with Administrative Clerks and District Court of Maryland Stamp indicating a disposition of not guilty and a possible fine of $70." The guide's answer: "The State analyst should request certified documents and clarification of possible fine." (§5.11, p. 47).

One citation, several violations

"For purposes of recording results of adjudicated citations, the dismissal of one charged violation on the citation does not necessarily mean that all violations on the citation were dismissed. The DataQs analyst must carefully review the adjudication outcome for each charge in order to determine which violations were dismissed and then document the results accordingly in SAFETYNET." (§5.6, p. 42).

In the guide's case study of one citation with three violations: "If no distinction is made, and ultimately not provided, then the State analyst should document all violations as 'Convicted.'" And: "Any violation on the inspection report not listed with the RDR should remain 'N/A.'" (§5.11, p. 46).

An "umbrella" violation

The guide recognizes that "in some cases the inspector may take into consideration two or more violations on the inspection report that support an 'umbrella' violation, such as operating an unsafe vehicle." (p. 42).

"IF there is no evidence of which underlying violations supported the 'umbrella' violation, THEN the analyst should only append the umbrella violation in SAFETYNET. The analyst may consult with the issuing officer to determine which violations formed the basis for the umbrella violation." (p. 43).

While the case is still in court

A case held in abeyance without payment of fines or court costs is not fully adjudicated. The analyst does not change the citation adjudication record until sufficient documentation confirms the final disposition (Analyst Guide §5.6, p. 42).

For an adjudicated-citation request, without sufficient verifiable disposition documents, the court outcome remains unknown. A missing document is not evidence of a conviction, dismissal, or not-guilty finding (Analyst Guide §§5.5–5.6).

The revised State DataQs process applies to requests submitted on or after September 18, 2026. It is not retroactive and does not establish deadlines for Federal reviews. The 2026 notice allows a request to be held while the citation awaits a court or administrative disposition, but not indefinitely (91 FR 20565). The 2014 case study describes closure pending the final court documents; neither passage treats a pending case as a final court outcome.

Fees, fines and diversion

Payment alone does not determine the outcome. FMCSA excludes incidental expenses imposed regardless of outcome, such as scheduling fees, certified-copy charges, and attorney fees, from its conviction definition (79 FR 32495; Analyst Guide §5.4).

The Analyst Guide treats costs or fees imposed for a diversion program as court costs qualifying as a conviction (§5.4, p. 40). A diversion or deferred-adjudication label alone does not establish a final disposition; a pending case and a documented final outcome must be distinguished.

Record treatment after a documented outcome

The requestor submits verifiable certified court disposition documents, or a direct link to official court results, through DataQs. The State verifies the documents and records the outcome (79 FR 32494–32495).

After the State verifies the disposition documents, FMCSA's policy excludes a not-guilty finding or dismissal without fine or punitive court costs from SMS and PSP. A dismissal with a fine or punitive court costs is recorded as a conviction and retained in SMS and PSP (79 FR 32495). Payment alone does not determine the outcome. FMCSA excludes incidental expenses imposed regardless of outcome, such as scheduling fees, certified-copy charges, and attorney fees, from its conviction definition (79 FR 32495; Analyst Guide §5.4). The requestor submits verifiable certified court disposition documents, or a direct link to official court results, through DataQs. The State verifies the documents and records the outcome (79 FR 32494–32495). These SMS/PSP effects do not erase the underlying MCMIS violation record. MCMIS retains the record with its court-outcome annotation; only violations determined to have been recorded in error are removed from MCMIS (Analyst Guide §5.9, p. 44).

The inspection is annotated for conviction of a different charge in SMS and PSP. In SMS, severity becomes 1 with no additional OOS weight (79 FR 32495; SMS Methodology p. 3-15, note 19).

The violation remains in SMS and PSP under the adjudicated-citation policy. That conviction alone is not a basis for exclusion under this policy; a separate error in the inspection record requires its own supporting evidence (Analyst Guide §§5.6, 5.9).

These SMS/PSP effects do not erase the underlying MCMIS violation record. MCMIS retains the record with its court-outcome annotation; only violations determined to have been recorded in error are removed from MCMIS (Analyst Guide §5.9, p. 44).

The burden of proof

The revised State DataQs process applies to requests submitted on or after September 18, 2026. It is not retroactive and does not establish deadlines for Federal reviews. The requestor bears the burden of proof at all three stages. A request to remove or modify information must explain the factual or legal basis for why it is incorrect or incomplete, with necessary supporting documents (91 FR 20567).

How long a review can be requested

The revised State DataQs process applies to requests submitted on or after September 18, 2026. It is not retroactive and does not establish deadlines for Federal reviews. The 2026 notice requires States to accept and conduct a good-faith review of inspection RDRs submitted within 3 years of the inspection and crash RDRs within 5 years of the crash (91 FR 20566).

How RoadsideProof handles this category

For this category the paid check looks for two documents: the citation, and the court disposition. The check is about whether the first filing is complete.

For an adjudicated-citation request, without sufficient verifiable disposition documents, the court outcome remains unknown. A missing document is not evidence of a conviction, dismissal, or not-guilty finding (Analyst Guide §§5.5–5.6).

This table summarizes FMCSA's adjudicated-citation policy; it is not a verbatim official table or a reading of your case. It describes record treatment after agency review, not an automatic change or advice on court strategy.

We do not file for you. You file from your own account and you sign it, and that signature carries 18 U.S.C. 1001.

We do not promise an outcome. The burden of proof is on the filer. The revised State DataQs process applies to requests submitted on or after September 18, 2026. It is not retroactive and does not establish deadlines for Federal reviews. Its stages are Initial Review, Reconsideration, and Final Review. FMCSA considers the State's RDR decision final after Final Review is completed; this is separate from a court's disposition of a citation.

Sources

FMCSA, DataQs Analyst Guide: Best Practices for Federal and State Agency Users, 2nd edition, December 2014, sections 4.12, 5.4, 5.5, 5.6 and 5.11, as hosted on the DataQs site and archived on 2026-05-26. Page numbers are the guide's own. Requests held while the case is pending: Federal Register, 91 FR 20565; burden of proof: 91 FR 20567; review window: 91 FR 20566; FR Doc. 2026-07429.