Questions on a window tint "fix-it" ticket

[MollysGirl3]

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

My son got a "fix-it" ticket for illegal window tint on the two front side windows. I have three questions.

1) The officer did not fill in the registered owner information on the ticket. Does that make the ticket incomplete and/or invalid?

2) My son does not own the car and cannot make the required fix (removing the tint). Does this mean anything to the courts?

3) Does the officer have to prove the tint violates the law by way of light transmission measurements with a meter? Or is his opinion and testimony sufficient for the courts?

Just trying to figure out what we're dealing with. Thanks for any help!

 

[startedone]

Well, it appears as if he does not the authority to fix it (not his car).

So he is stuck either pleading guilty or pleading not guilty.

Can a judge accept an officer's testimony as gold? Sure. Should he, is there any case law that you can show to help guide the judge to a proper ruling? I would imagine there is ... zip over to "google scholar" and search. Best to have case law to cite if you wish to argue "the cop just guessed" because the cop will say "I'm trained to do this"... and your will say "whaaaat?" and judge will say "guilty"

I don't know to be honest .. post back with a case cite.

 

[CdwJava]

1) The officer did not fill in the registered owner information on the ticket. Does that make the ticket incomplete and/or invalid?

By itself, no.

2) My son does not own the car and cannot make the required fix (removing the tint). Does this mean anything to the courts?

Only if the officer checked the box indicating the violation was the responsibility of the owner. Your son can always go to court and argue that he is not responsible for the car.

3) Does the officer have to prove the tint violates the law by way of light transmission measurements with a meter? Or is his opinion and testimony sufficient for the courts?

That depends on the specific code section cited. What was it?

 

[MollysGirl3]

Cvc 26708

The officer cited CVC 26708 (a).

 

[CdwJava]

Here is the code section:

26708. (a) (1) A person shall not drive any motor vehicle with any
object or material placed, displayed, installed, affixed, or applied
upon the windshield or side or rear windows.
(2) A person shall not drive any motor vehicle with any object or
material placed, displayed, installed, affixed, or applied in or upon
the vehicle that obstructs or reduces the driver's clear view
through the windshield or side windows.
(3) This subdivision applies to a person driving a motor vehicle
with the driver's clear vision through the windshield, or side or
rear windows, obstructed by snow or ice.​

So, no measurement device would be needed as the state merely needs to show the elements of one of the aforementioned subsections.

Her best bet might be to advise the court that she was not the owner of the vehicle and cannot have the matter corrected. Though, the section does state that a person shall not drive a vehicle with anything like this in place, so not owning the vehicle may not be compelling to the court.

 

[startedone]

The officer cited CVC 26708 (a).

And what did google scholar tell you about this type of case?