How Do I Fight a "Failure To Signal" Traffic-Ticket?

What is the name of your state? New York. The event itself happened in the Jamaica area of Queens, NYC.

That's where I was recently issued a ticket (unjustified, I believe!) for "failure to signal a turn", with the officer saying that I failed to use my turn-signal at not just one but two turns, and also adding the admonishment that "I could have given you two tickets but I'm only going to give you one".

How do I fight this?

I am innocent of the charge, I pleaded "Not Guilty" on the summons, and will make my case at the hearing, which comes up later this month. But when it comes to a case of a traffic court judge probably automatically favoring the testimony of a police officer over a defendant civilian, how can I win? What information should I seek from the police officer, or from elsewhere, in advance of the hearing, and what information and approach (in addition to honesty) should I pursue or present in the hearing, so that justice wins out and the charge is dismissed?

And, as I've also read in the fine-print on the back of the ticket that the court has the discretion to ADD ON CHARGES during the hearing, is it possible -- and legal -- for the ticketing-officer to have the judge ADD that unspecified "second ticket" -- the one that the officer said he "could have" also given me (though he never said what it would have been for, though my guess is that he meant it would have been for the alleged 2nd "failure to signal")? And if so, then how to I fight THAT one or have the judge disallow it from being added to the charges against me?

As I told the officer, I did indeed properly signal my turns, as I always do, and I also have an excellent driving-record, and believe that I am innocent of the charge. Note: I spoke to the officer respectfully and politely, but with urgency, as I also noted to him that I was under much stress, being ill and also extremely pressed for time, having to be at a critical nearby appointment before 5pm; it was currently about 4:40pm.

As I recall it, here's the chronology:

It was a clear day. I was driving -- at normal speeds, on regular neighborhood streets -- to get to my appointment. Shortly after I stopped at a red light, a police car came up behind me, its lights flashing, and a police officer came over to my car window. I asked him what the problem was. I had no idea why he had come over to me. Rather than answer my question, he requested to see my license, registration, and insurance card.

As I was going to my wallet for my license and registration, I again asked him what the problem was, but he didn't answer the question, instead he just repeated his request for my license, registration, and insurance card.

I handed him the license and registration, and started searching for my insurance card. As I was looking for it (I was unsure of whether it was in my glove-compartment or my briefcase), I also asked him -- politely, but urgently -- if this will take long, as I was ill and had only a very short time to get to a critical nearby appointment, explaining that I had to get there before 5pm and that it would be a serious problem if I miss it.

As I continued looking for my insurance card, he took my license and registration and went back to his car. I estimate that maybe 5-10 minutes passed before he came back to my car and gave me back my license and registration -- plus a folded ticket.

I asked him what the ticket was for, and he responded that I could read it on the ticket. I said I know, but I again asked him if he could please tell me what the ticket is for. He gave the same reply, and I again asked him, still politely, if he could please tell me what I did and why he is issuing me a ticket.

He then answered that I had failed to use my turn-signal on two previous turns. I insisted that I had indeed properly signalled, as I always signal when turning. I also noted that I have a perfect driving-record and that I'm always careful to obey the traffic laws. He then added that I was "lucky" (or maybe he said "fortunate") because "I could have given you two tickets but I'm only going to give you one".

Then he asked me to operate my turn-signals, and he went to the back of the car to see that they were working -- which he agreed they were.

And he departed.

So I pleaded "Not Guilty" on the ticket, sent it in, and now have a court-date in about two weeks.

But here are my issues:

How do I prove, to the judge's satisfaction, that I operated my turn-signals, or even give evidence to that effect? What evidence can I present? How do I prove, or give evidence, that the officer's charge is not valid? Is there information, or data, or even a videotape, that might exist and that this officer generated -- and that I should obtain -- that can help disprove his charges and prove my innocence? How and where can I obtain those materials? And, what will the judge be looking for that I should be aware of, in how he or she balances the testimony of the police officer versus me the civilian defendant, in the hearing?

Or am I facing a "lost cause"?

And would hiring an attorney, in this matter, do any better than if I fight the case myself, considering the above details of the case? Or would I just basically be wasting my money?

Suggestions would be appreciated.

Thanks.

IMHO you are wasting your time now, and your money if you hire an attorney.

Unless there is some hidden video tape of you actually using your signal, you are not going to be able to prove that the officer ticketed you incorrectly.

Beyond your testimony...

You can bring diagrams, maps, and photos of the area. try terraserver.microsoft.com

You can question the officer as to his position to see the two intersections you are charged with failure to signal at. -he may not be able to show he was in position.

His failure to say what he was stopping you for at the intial contact can be brought up in court - it does make it look like a profiling stop - where he invented the charges later...

The officer may not show up. and he might not be as comfortable lying under oath...

Charges can't be added at trial.

cepe10 said:

Charges can't be added at trial.

Click to expand...

really? in most jurisdictions within our country, charges can be filed up to 1 year later. If they can be incorporated into an existing trial would be the only defense to them at the moment. If the defendant allowed them, they could be. If handled correctly, the defendent could have them defered for another trial, at best.

Notes are often included on tickets concerning additional charges from the incident that can be charged any time within the SoL allows them to be. As long as the courts are willing to prosecute the charges, they can be placed against the defendent.

I won't argue with your other statements since I believe they do have some validity but in reality I believe fighting the ticket would be an effort in futility. An officers testimony is going to be taken over a defendent unless it can de refuted with the ideas you have suggested or others. Unless somebody is quite adept at court proceedings, they are usually going to lose. I know, that is a defeatist attitude but it is also generally realistic as well.

justalayman said:

really? in most jurisdictions within our country, charges can be filed up to 1 year later. If they can be incorporated into an existing trial would be the only defense to them at the moment. If the defendant allowed them, they could be. If handled correctly, the defendent could have them defered for another trial, at best.

Click to expand...

You are correct, sir! It's technically not "adding" charges so much as "amending" the ticket. Of course, if new charges are added, one is entitled to an adjournment to prepare a defense to them. Compounding all this here is that if this ticket is heard in the TVB system and not the courts (which I am 99% positive it would be - probably at the Rockaway Blvd location), then the TVB, as "only" a quasi-administrative body (a subset of the DMV), is also free from compliance with most of the rules found in civil courts. (For example, I don't think any of their ALJ's have met hearsay that they don't like.)

justalayman said:

Notes are often included on tickets concerning additional charges from the incident that can be charged any time within the SoL allows them to be. As long as the courts are willing to prosecute the charges, they can be placed against the defendent.

Click to expand...

100% correct.

justalayman said:

I won't argue with your other statements since I believe they do have some validity but in reality I believe fighting the ticket would be an effort in futility. An officers testimony is going to be taken over a defendent unless it can de refuted with the ideas you have suggested or others. Unless somebody is quite adept at court proceedings, they are usually going to lose. I know, that is a defeatist attitude but it is also generally realistic as well.

Click to expand...

Also true, doubly so when dealing with the TVB. About the best thing you can hope for is that the officer doesn't appear, in which case you should request a dismissal. (Of course, the ALJs frequently see nothing wrong with adjouring the case, over your objection, to give the officer a second chance to show up.) If he does, and it's purely a "he said, she said" with you and the officer, there isn't much of a chance at winning.

Normally you would have two choices - speak to the officer prior to your case being called and see if he'd amenable to a plea down to a lower violation, or just state your case and do your best to make the cop seem like an incompetant moron. Here, a failure to signal is a 2-pointer, which is as low as they go - there are no 1-point violations. So, unless you have more experience testifying before an ALJ than the officer who does it for a living, well... you can see where this is going.

Good luck whatever you choose.