Treated stop sign as a yield; prinicipled ticket fighter

What is the name of your state?
Georgia

I was recently stopped by an officer for "treating a stop sign as a yield sign" as stated on ticket. The cop was behind me (I guess) but I am 98% sure I stopped. The intersection in question is a 4-way stop with the intersecting streets consisting of a dead end street to a railroad and a narrow rarely trafficed residential street. There were no cars at any of the stop signs nor were there pedestrians present. When the officer stopped me he stated that he was " pulling me over for failure to stop" when I looked puzzled he said not at the last stop sign (which was a major intersection) but the little one before that. When I signed the ticket he stated that I needed to be careful because of children however it was 9:00am, school had already started, I was not in a school zone, and there are no sidewalks on these narrow streets for pedestrians.

I want to plead not guilty due to the subjective nature of the violation and the officer admitting that he witnessed stopping at the subsequent stop sign not 30 seconds after the violation took place. I also plan to contend that the punishment is too severe based on the circumstances of the violation.

Do I have a shot?

What is the subjective nature about it? How do you suppose you are going to contend the punishment does not fit the crime? It is a standard fine for anyone, not just you.

Unfortunately for you, stopping at a stop sign is pretty much cut and dry ... you either did or you did not. It's not based upon the presence of children (and you have the school schedule memorized? Along with the full knowledge that every child in the area ... the area without sidewalks ... is at school on time?), the presence of other cars, or your belief that the punishment is stoo severe. I guarantee if you try and argue those angles, the judge will shut you down quickly.

Additionally, the officer is under NO legal obligation to stop you the instant the violation occurs. There could be any number of reasons why he did not stop you right away ... or he might have just decided he wanted to finish his coffee first - it really doesn't matter. As long as he maintained a clear and unobstructed view of your vehicle and you, then he can stop you within a reasonable time frame after the violation.

Based upon your contentions as listed, no, you do not have "a shot".

Carl

response

The point is that it is the officers word against mine. He cannot state with certainty that another fellow officer would have issued ticket under the same circumstances. Second, I did not run the stop sign, I stopped but the officer felt that it wasn't sufficient enough according to his judgement. The street I was on 5 miles long with stop signs every quarter mile. I stopped the same way at each stop. I came to the complete stop looked both ways and preceded. He witnessed me doing so at the very next sign not 30 seconds later. A verbal or written warning would have sufficed.


As for the children, I have lived in Stone Mountain for 12 years driven down that street thousands of times and have never seen a child near that intersection. The darting four year old would be hit whether I stopped 2 seconds or ten minutes. Thats not cold hearted but its the truth and it was irrelevant to circumstances surrouding the stop because there were no children within a mile of the area. But I will not bring it up in court because I would basically be arguing the merits of whether the stop sign should be there at all and that would be counterproductive. ( It has been there less than a year).

""""The point is that it is the officers word against mine."

Which is the case 90% of the time in traffic court matters. And the officer usually prevails as it is generally assumed that he has the least bias int he matter and the least reason to lie.

""""He cannot state with certainty that another fellow officer would have issued ticket under the same circumstances."

He does not have to state that. I always love the excuse, though, "I did it yesterday and a cop saw me and didn't do anything ... I figured it was okay."

All because another officer may or may not have issued a citation has no bearing on YOUR citation.

""""Second, I did not run the stop sign, I stopped but the officer felt that it wasn't sufficient enough according to his judgement."

I presume that means that you 'kinda' stopped? Like, you tapped the brakes? The law requires you come to a complete and total stop - not that you slow to a a really slow pace. Apparently you may believe you came to a complete stop, and the officer disagrees. But its not a question of stopping "enough" - you either did, or, you did NOT stop.

""""I came to the complete stop looked both ways and preceded."

Ah, then you have a defense to mount.

""""A verbal or written warning would have sufficed."

Perhaps. But, he is under no legal obligation to give you one. In many jurisdictions in CA officers have opted to adopt a no warning policy due to allegations of racial profiling ... one stop equals one ticket - no warnings.

And, of course, the issue of the presence of the children is irrelevant to whether you stopped or had to stop or not.

It seems to me that you have only your version of events to mount as a defense. And you certainly have that right. But, if it comes down to your word against his, I'm afraid that the officer will have the edge.

Sorry.

Carl