• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Defective Equipment: Brake Lights

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

Spyder994

Junior Member
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Texas

I was pulled over and written a citation for non-working stoplamps (though my tail lights were functional) last month. The issuing officer said that he almost never writes citations for burnt out brake lights unless none are functional.

This was indeed the case. I found this strange b/c while the vehicle is older, it is in excellent condition and well-maintained. I had even witnessed the brake lamps working the previous day. Additionally, I make regular checks on all of its systems and correct them ASAP if I find problems. This includes the electrical system (including fuses) and lights. I should also note that this vehicle is factory equipped with a lamp failure relay, which is designed to notify the driver with an idiot light if any light on the car has failed.

Back to the night of the citation: The light malfunction light was not lit at any time (It does in fact work; I have seen it work before). Due to this factor and my strict maintenance schedule for the car, I had no reason to believe that anything was wrong. Immediately after the traffic stop was completed, I drove to a well-lit parking lot directly across from the residential area where we had pulled over for the officer. I examined the fuses and saw no blown fuses. This particular car uses a type of fuse that older European cars use, so it is possible to see if any fuses are blown without actually removing them. See (www.joetlc.com/images/MBFUSEKIT.jpg) and (http://www.pelicanparts.com/techarticles/911_carrera_oil_cooler/pic2.JPG) for references. I decided to remove the fuse for the brake lamps anyway to get a closer look at it. I found that one metal end of the fuse had a very small amount of corrosion on it, not visible with the fuse in its holder. Since I keep new replacement fuses in the car, I popped one in and the brake lights worked once again. I later studied the wiring diagrams and found that for the defective lamp idiot light to be lit, the relay must find unequal electrical loads in the circuit (i.e. what would be seen if one brake lamp was burnt out). Since both lamps were out, there was indeed equal load and the light never came on!

I went to the courthouse with the idea that this was a fix-it ticket that would be dismissed with a small administrative fee as soon as an officer saw that the problem had been corrected. I was shocked when I was told that this was not the case and that the fine would be $142. The clerk even suggested setting up a date to talk to the judge. I did so and plead "not guilty". My trial date is set for later this month.

I would like some advice on a couple different points here.

1) Given that I have not acted with gross negligence and allowed all three of my brake lamps to burn out (as the officer probably assumed since he was talking about burnt out bulbs), my strict adherence to regular vehicle systems maintenance, and the immediate repair of the problem, what are my chances of having this dismissed or being found not guilty if I present all of the aforementioned facts to the judge? I know it will vary from judge to judge, but in general, what have members here seen in similar situations?

2) As stated below in subsection (c), I may be permitted to have the citation dismissed if I fix the problem before my first court appearance and pay an administrative fee. So why then am I being asked to pay $142 with no option for dismissal? It seems crazy that a citation for expired registration/failure to update address/expired inspection/no front plate can be dismissed, but one for a defect that I had no idea about, cannot be. The problem with all of the other tickets I just mentioned is that the vehicle operator can easily determine if they are in violation of these laws.

I've pulled the following from the Texas Transportation Code Ch. 547:
Sec. 547.004. GENERAL OFFENSES. (a) A person commits an offense that is a misdemeanor if the person operates or moves or, as an owner, knowingly permits another to operate or move, a vehicle that:

(1) is unsafe so as to endanger a person;

(2) is not equipped in a manner that complies with the vehicle equipment standards and requirements established by this chapter; or

(3) is equipped in a manner prohibited by this chapter.

(b) A person commits an offense that is a misdemeanor if the person operates a vehicle equipped with an item of vehicle equipment that the person knows has been determined in a compliance proceeding under Section 547.206 to not comply with a department standard.

(c) A court may dismiss a charge brought under this section if the defendant:

(1) remedies the defect before the defendant's first court appearance; and

(2) pays an administrative fee not to exceed $10.
I was cited under Sec. 547.323, which reads:

Sec. 547.323. STOPLAMPS REQUIRED. (a) Except as provided by Subsection (b), a motor vehicle, trailer, semitrailer, or pole trailer shall be equipped with at least two stoplamps.

(b) A passenger car manufactured or assembled before the model year 1960 shall be equipped with at least one stoplamp.

(c) A stoplamp shall be mounted on the rear of the vehicle.

(d) A stoplamp shall emit a red or amber light, or a color between red and amber, that is:

(1) visible in normal sunlight at a distance of at least 300 feet from the rear of the vehicle; and

(2) displayed when the vehicle service brake is applied.

(e) If vehicles are traveling in combination, only the stoplamps on the rearmost vehicle are required to emit a light for the distance specified in Subsection (d).

(f) A stoplamp may be included as a part of another rear lamp.
 


justalayman

Senior Member
(c) A court may dismiss a charge brought under this section if the defendant:
ask the judge if he will since it is apparently within his options. Simply put though, it does not say shall.

that section still implies you have to attend court.

1) remedies the defect before the defendant's first court appearance
 

Spyder994

Junior Member
Thanks for your reply. My hearing was this morning. I presented all of the evidence as stated and was found guilty. The judge noted that he thought that the section I cited regarding dismissal with an administrative fee had been changed last year. He did reference his own copy of the law, which read the same as mine. Regardless of this fact, he held that he thought it had been changed so that correction of the problem was no longer an option.

I have found the latest copy of this section of the law from the TX legislature's website and have confirmed that the section regarding dismissal upon correction of the problem is still in place. I am considering filing an appeal due to the fact that the judge's assumption about a change in the law is incorrect.

Any advice on this?
 

justalayman

Senior Member
not sure it will get you anywhere since it is discretionary but the judge did make a mistake of law and that could allow you the appeal. If you can argue the judge did not consider an action available within the law because he erroneously believed the law was different than the one he had in his hands and as such, the judge may have dismissed if he was aware of the actual law.


actually sounds like an idiot judge. You do not make decisions based on "I think they changed this or that" without researching your "I think".
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top