101 and counting.

[mojo41]

This is a speeding tic in ca.
Returning home on Feb. 21, at 7:00 pm, in heavy traffic, with my spouse beside me, I was ticketed by radar/lidar chp for doing 101 miles per hour. Now, how? you might wonder is this possible, when the amount of cars on the road literally dictates your speed.
The officer didn't appear to be drinking, and he seemed guinely angry at me for going so fast.I was doing 60 miles per hour, now what in heavens name is going on in his head?
I've been told that he wrote down the wrong code and section, 22348(b), does it matter? He wanted to get that one mile over a hundred, I guess for the new lunchroom.
My appearance date is April 4, 8:15 am, go figure, I live 300 hundred miles from there. It is a mandatory court appearance, they won't give me a trial date on the phone or by mail. Want to move closer to my home, but there is no other superior court closer in that county.
Would really appreciate a "heads up" or an opinion on this. As stupid as this sounds, the officer seems like a really sincere, honest cop, so how could he be so wrong?
confusedmojo

[Maestro64]

Because LIDAR is high tech range finder that calculate speed and any movement when it takes a measurement (called slip effect or Panning Error) can cause a higher than actual speed. Example is he targets the front plate but because your car is moving the beam slips up the hood and at that instance it just added 4 or 5 feet on the distance it thinks you just traveled and calculated your speed to be faster.

[I_Got_Banned]

Originally Posted by mojo41

I've been told that he wrote down the wrong code and section, 22348(b),

Here’s CVC Section 22348:
22348. (a) Notwithstanding subdivision (b) of Section 22351, a person shall not drive a vehicle upon a highway with a speed limit established pursuant to Section 22349 or 22356 at a speed greater than that speed limit.
(b) A person who drives a vehicle upon a highway at a speed greater than 100 miles per hour is guilty of an infraction punishable, as follows:
(1) Upon a first conviction of a violation of this subdivision, by a fine of not to exceed five hundred dollars ($500). The court may also suspend the privilege of the person to operate a motor vehicle for a period not to exceed 30 days pursuant to Section 13200.5.
(2) Upon a conviction under this subdivision of an offense that occurred within three years of a prior offense resulting in a conviction of an offense under this subdivision, by a fine of not to exceed seven hundred fifty dollars ($750). The person's privilege to operate a motor vehicle shall be suspended by the Department of Motor Vehicles pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 13355.
(3) Upon a conviction under this subdivision of an offense that occurred within five years of two or more prior offenses resulting in convictions of offenses under this subdivision, by a fine of not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000). The person's privilege to operate a motor vehicle shall be suspended by the Department of Motor Vehicles pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 13355.

Sounds to me like it is the correct code section for an alleged speed exceeding 100mph.
Also keep in mind that the penalty for a 22348 conviction involves the addition of 2 points to your driving record as opposed to a single point in the case of a less that 100mph citation.

Originally Posted by mojo41

He wanted to get that one mile over a hundred, I guess for the new lunchroom.

Not sure what that means!

Originally Posted by mojo41

Want to move closer to my home, but there is no other superior court closer in that county.

Even if it were in the same county and even if there was a court that is closer, the time to request a change of venue WAS when the officer was issuing the citation. Too late now.

Originally Posted by mojo41

so how could he be so wrong?

Maestro explained one possibility.

If you really were not traveling that fast then I think you could initially question him about traffic conditions at the time of your stop; then you'd simply question him as to what he witnessed and how fast he visually estimated your speed to be at.

Theoretically, an officer will usually visually estimate a vehicle's speed, then follow that up with a reading by a Radar/Lidar gun. If both are consistent, then he/she can warrant writing a citation.

Alternatively, you might want to consult an attorney who works in the area where the citation was issued. Considering the fact that you are 300 miles away, the attorney might be better qualified to handle this matter in court than you can be BUT, an attorney can also appear on your behalf thereby saving you a trip back that way.

[Jim_bo]

Acording to the Vehicle Code, there is no such thing as a mandatory court appearance.

40902. (a) (1) The court , pursuant to this section, shall, by
rule, provide that the defendant may elect to have a trial by written
declaration upon any alleged infraction, as charged by the citing
officer, involving a violation of this code or any local ordinance
adopted pursuant to this code, other than an infraction cited
pursuant to Article 2 (commencing with Section 23152) of Chapter 12
of Division 11.

You have the right to a trial by written declaration. You also have the right to plead not guilty by mail

40519. (b) Any person who has received a written notice to appear may, prior to the time at which the person is required to appear, plead not guilty in writing in lieu of appearing in person. The written plea shall be directed to the court named in the notice to appear and, if mailed, shall be sent by certified or registered mail postmarked not later than five days prior to the day upon which appearance is required. The written plea and request to the court or city agency shall be accompanied by a deposit consisting of the amount of bail established pursuant to Section 1269b of the Penal Code, together with any assessment required by Section 42006 of this code or Section 1464 of the Penal Code, for that offense, which amount shall be used for the purpose of guaranteeing the appearance of the defendant at the time and place set by the court for trial and to apply toward the payment of any fine or assessment prescribed by the court in the event of conviction. Upon receipt of the plea and deposit, the case shall be set for arraignment and trial on the same date, unless the defendant requests separate arraignment.
Thereafter, the case shall be conducted in the same manner as if the defendant had appeared in person, had made his or her plea in open court, and had deposited that sum as bail. The court or the clerk of the court shall notify the accused of the time and place of trial by first-class mail postmarked at least 10 days prior to the time set for the trial. Any person using this procedure shall be deemed to have waived the right to be tried within the statutory period.

The only problem is that you will have to pay the bail up front (which will likely be about $1000) and you waive your right to a speedy trial. If you are in the area, you can drop off your TBWD in person or you can plead not guilty (it can be before the date on your ticket) and you will preserve your right to a speedy trial.

[I_Got_Banned]

Originally Posted by Jim_bo

Acording to the Vehicle Code, there is no such thing as a mandatory court appearance.

According to the California Rules of Court there is!

Originally Posted by Jim_bo

You have the right to a trial by written declaration.

You forgot to tell him about your "rubber stamp" thing you always associate with TBWD, Jim!

[Jim_bo]

Originally Posted by I_Got_Banned

According to the California Rules of Court there is!

Show the rule that overrides the statutory law.

You forgot to tell him about your "rubber stamp" thing you always associate with TBWD, Jim!

That wasn't information the OP was looking for. Additionally, he CERTAINLY didn't post a new thread just so he could watch you poke at me. Grow up, post something useful, or go away.

[I_Got_Banned]

Originally Posted by Jim_bo

Grow up, post something useful, or go away.

Something useful? Like telling the OP he doesn't have to appear for a mandatory court appearance?

He has no other option... Not by phone, not online... And similarly, your suggestion to communicate with the court by mail will also be deemed unacceptable!

Practice what you preach!

[Jim_bo]

Originally Posted by I_Got_Banned

Something useful? Like telling the OP he doesn't have to appear for a mandatory court appearance?

He has no other option... Not by phone, not online... And similarly, your suggestion to communicate with the court by mail will also be deemed unacceptable!

Practice what you preach!

Well, I have posted two sections of statutory law to support my position. You have only contradicted me based on wild opinion.

I have had a court demand a court appearance before. I simply sent in a motion to have my plea registered by mail and my TBWD accepted. After consideration of my motion, I soon recieved correspondence back stating that my TBWD would be granted.

So, once again, if you can produce a court rule that overrides statutory law, please do so. Otherwise, your posts are confusing to the OP.



By the way... I don't understand the "practice what you preach" line. I think I have!

[mojo41]

First off, THANKS, I really need the conversation right now, it helps me think it's really not that bad, kinda.
Anyway, I thought lidar could only be used in a stationary mode. But what you said, regarding the sweep from nose to rear of the car, makes a lot of sense, I have no plate in front, the only reflective qualities would be the rear plate. Don't you think he would realize that it wasn't a true reading? He was curious about the car, asking, no telling me the year.
If I do decide to retain attourney, and I'm leaning that way, I wouldn't have to show at the arraignment, right?
I'll keep you posted, mojo41

[Jim_bo]

Your attorney could appear at arraingment for you. However, you could do a TBWD without an attorney. If you are found guilty, you can ask for a Trial de Novo (a new trial). At that time, you could hire the attorney to represent you. The TBWD gives you at least one shot at a dismissal without the expense of an attorney.

[I_Got_Banned]

Originally Posted by Jim_bo

Well, I have posted two sections of statutory law to support my position. You have only contradicted me based on wild opinion.

We've discussed this same matter many times... In THIS same Forum...

Also, I'm not sure what leads you to believe that information that the OP has mentioned receiving from the court -whether it was by phone, in the mail or in person- as WILD OPINION.

Originally Posted by Jim_bo

After consideration of my motion, I soon recieved correspondence back stating that my TBWD would be granted.

Well, then in the spirit of helping the OP, since you're always so helpful, why don't you advise the OP as to how to file a motion and what he should argue in support of his request that the court allow him to forgo his mandatory court appearance, which by the way HE mentioned, and you replied by suggesting there is no such thing...

Originally Posted by Jim_bo

After consideration of my motion, I soon recieved correspondence back stating that my TBWD would be granted.

If I were a Judge, I too would bend the rules a bit to avoid having you in my courtroom...

Originally Posted by Jim_bo

your posts are confusing to the OP.

So now YOU are gonna decide what is confusing the OP and what is not? I would venture to think that our OP is intelligent enough to decide what is in his best interest. That is NOT your job to decide for him.

Originally Posted by Jim_bo

By the way... I don't understand the "practice what you preach" line. I think I have!

My asking you to "practice what you preach" was in reference to the "Grow up" and the "go away" parts of your post.

Your bitter attitude towards me, and for no justifiable reason, is immature as it is offensive, and it is accomplishing the exact opposite of you would like everyone to perceive as "good intentions".

Lastly, if you don't like what I post, IGNORE IT &/OR SCROLL PAST IT. I hope THAT is easy enough for you to understand.

[I_Got_Banned]

The TBWD option is ONLY available to you assuming the court somehow decides to forgo your having to submit to the mandatory court appearance requirement.

[Jim_bo]

Originally Posted by I_Got_Banned

The TBWD option is ONLY available to you assuming the court somehow decides to forgo your having to submit to the mandatory court appearance requirement.

What part of the word "SHALL" is hard to understand???

40902. (a) (1) The court , pursuant to this section, shall, by
rule, provide that the defendant may elect to have a trial by written
declaration upon any alleged infraction, as charged by the citing
officer, involving a violation of this code or any local ordinance
adopted pursuant to this code, other than an infraction cited
pursuant to Article 2 (commencing with Section 23152) of Chapter 12
of Division 11.

Let me help:

shall - (in laws, directives, etc.) must; is or are obliged to

[I_Got_Banned]

Originally Posted by Jim_bo

What part of the word "SHALL" is hard to understand???



Let me help:

Glad to see you're in a better mood this morning, Jim!

[Jim_bo]

Originally Posted by I_Got_Banned

Glad to see you're in a better mood this morning, Jim!

Glad to see you are still arguing your opinion against statutory law.