Driving in violation of license restrictions but charged with something else

[TheAnomaly]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Ohio

I was stopped because the license plate light on my car had burned out. Due to my vision, my license is restricted to daylight hours only. (I have 20/40 vision, which is the requirement for night driving, but I only have vision in one eye, which changes the required acuity to 20/30.)

Instead of citing me for the restrictions, I have been charged with not having a valid license.

Since this is a different law, did I just get lucky this time? Or will the end result be the same?

[Zigner]

Originally Posted by TheAnomaly

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Ohio

I was stopped because the license plate light on my car had burned out. Due to my vision, my license is restricted to daylight hours only. (I have 20/40 vision, which is the requirement for night driving, but I only have vision in one eye, which changes the required acuity to 20/30.)

Instead of citing me for the restrictions, I have been charged with not having a valid license.

Since this is a different law, did I just get lucky this time? Or will the end result be the same?

Please post the exact section of the law you are charged with violating

[TheAnomaly]

Westlake 335.01a1 Driver's License Required

No person, except those expressly exempted under Ohio RC 4507.03, 4507.04, and 4507.05, shall operate any motor vehicle upon a public road or highway or any public or private property used by the public for purposes of vehicular travel or parking in this Municipality unless the person has a valid driver's license issued under Ohio RC Chapter 4507 or a commercial driver's license issued under Ohio RC Chapter 4506.

[efflandt]

You have a license restricted to daylight driving. Your vision is apparently 20/40, which is worse than some 20/30 requirement.

He noticed a license light not working, which sounds like night time.

Your license is not valid for night driving, therefore, driving without a valid license. What was your question again?

When you say lucky, have you been stopped for this before when you were charged with something more costly in dollars or points?

[TheAnomaly]

I've never been stopped before. I got stuck at work until close, and felt that sleeping in the car outside of work or walking the three hours home weren't the most appealing options. (They're looking much better now.)

I'm just not sure what could happen, since the punishments listed under that section of the law are based upon how long the license has been expired. And there is a separate law (335.07b) which covers what I was actually guilty of doing. (Driving under suspension or in violation of license restrictions)

I don't know whether I'd be off the hook because they're charging me with the wrong crime, or if I'd just be punished for the law I'm charged with instead of the one I committed. If I were guilty of not having a "valid" license, it's a fourth degree misdemeanor with no license suspension for a first offense. Violating restrictions is a first degree misdemeanor with a mandatory suspension.

[I_Got_Banned]

Originally Posted by TheAnomaly

I've never been stopped before. I got stuck at work until close, and felt that sleeping in the car outside of work or walking the three hours home weren't the most appealing options. (They're looking much better now.)

I'm just not sure what could happen, since the punishments listed under that section of the law are based upon how long the license has been expired. And there is a separate law (335.07b) which covers what I was actually guilty of doing. (Driving under suspension or in violation of license restrictions)

I don't know whether I'd be off the hook because they're charging me with the wrong crime, or if I'd just be punished for the law I'm charged with instead of the one I committed. If I were guilty of not having a "valid" license, it's a fourth degree misdemeanor with no license suspension for a first offense. Violating restrictions is a first degree misdemeanor with a mandatory suspension.

You are being charged with driving on an invalid license 335.01.a.1. You can show your driver's license to the judge which will prove to him that your license is still valid then the citation should be dismissed.

Even if the officer were to testify that he cited you for violating the restriction as is described in 335.07b, the fact that he listed the wrong statute on the citation, and since you were never sent an amended citation means they cant find you guilty of that... Not unless the prosecutor decides to amend it on the spot (which means you can request a continuance to prepare a defense) or if the officer decides to issue you another one right then and there (which I doubt he'll do)...

[Zigner]

Originally Posted by I_Got_Banned

You are being charged with driving on an invalid license 335.01.a.1. You can show your driver's license to the judge which will prove to him that your license is still valid then the citation should be dismissed.

Even if the officer were to testify that he cited you for violating the restriction as is described in 335.07b, the fact that he listed the wrong statute on the citation, and since you were never sent an amended citation means they cant find you guilty of that... Not unless the prosecutor decides to amend it on the spot (which means you can request a continuance to prepare a defense) or if the officer decides to issue you another one right then and there (which I doubt he'll do)...

The license was invalid AT NIGHT.

[I_Got_Banned]

Originally Posted by Zigner

The license was invalid AT NIGHT.

No, the license IS restricted AT NIGHT...

[Zigner]

Originally Posted by I_Got_Banned

No, the license IS restricted AT NIGHT...

Which would mean that his license wasn't VALID to be used during the restricted period.

[I_Got_Banned]

Originally Posted by Zigner

Which would mean that his license wasn't VALID to be used during the restricted period.

Point is, the OP was not cited for driving during a restricted period. The OP was cited for driving without a valid license.

[Zigner]

Originally Posted by I_Got_Banned

Point is, the OP was not cited for driving during a restricted period. The OP was cited for driving without a valid license.

Ok - his license was restricted during darkness. Thus, it would not function as a VALID LICENSE during darkness.

[I_Got_Banned]

Originally Posted by Zigner

Ok - his license was restricted during darkness. Thus, it would not function as a VALID LICENSE during darkness.

1. The validity or lack thereof of the OP's license due to the restriction is not dictated by the vehicle code section he was charged with violating.

If the OP was properly cited in violation of the restriction, then the citation should show 335.07b NOT 335.01a1.

So you're still wrong! You can continue to argue but you'll be doing so alone...

Happy Monday

[The Occultist]

I think we can all agree that the issue at hand will be TOTALLY subject to the interpretation of the law as made by the judge, meaning the OP will not find much insight at this particular forum, n'est-ce pas?

OP, my advice: find a traffic attorney. A local attorney knows best what the courts want to hear, and as such present the highest potential for yielding the most favorable results. Many attorneys will offer free/cheap consultations, so you should take advantage of this and sit down with a couple to see what insight they may have to offer.