• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

22348(b) VC Exceeding 100 mph

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

Status
Not open for further replies.

jtsnow0621

Junior Member
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CA

I was given a ticket under 22348(b) for exceeding 100 mph (cited at 103 mph) at 12:35 in the morning. Traffic was going at a speed of around 85 (even though this is not a defense) since there were not a lot of cars on the road and although I was always aware of my speed to keep it under 100, I don't think I was wrongly cited since the I-5 has some downward sloping hills.

This is my first offense and I have no citations on my drivers license. I don't know what I should do. I heard you can go to court and plead guilty to a lesser charge which I have no problem doing. I just don't want this two point offense on my record because I'm a student and can't afford my insurance going up any higher. I don't want to go to trial or protest the ticket or anything, but was wondering if there was a way to go down to a lesser charge where I could do traffic school and have it removed from my record. Any suggestions? What should I say or do?

Thanks,
jtsnow0621
 


Zigner

Senior Member, Non-Attorney
What are you talking about??? He was charged with driving 3 mph over the limit!!! Any prosecutor would jump on a chance to plea that case.
Jim - where (in California) is the "limit" 100 mph? :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Go back to bed and get some rest. Even for YOU, this is nonsense.
 

JIMinCA

Member
Jim - where (in California) is the "limit" 100 mph? :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Go back to bed and get some rest. Even for YOU, this is nonsense.
Have you even read 22348(b)???

22348 (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:
He wasn't charged with exceeding the speed limit. He was charged with exceeding 100 mph. Therefore, he is 3mph over. If he was charged with 22349(a) he would be 38mph over.

I know you aren't really that smart... but the math isn't that hard.
 

Hey There

Member
Knowledge is the basis for making decisions.

22348(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.
CA. also adds assessments to the base fine so that a fine for $100.00 with assessments can equal $361.00.
Penalty Assessments
1. $10.00 for each $10.00 or fraction of
2.20% of base fine
3. $7.00 for each $10.oo or fraction of
4. $2.00 for each $10.00 or fraction of
5.$5.00 for each $10.00 0or fraction of
6. $10.00 when approved by county Board of Supervisors.
(Source:A book published by NOLO on contesting traffic tickets in CA.)
A Courtesy Notice is nornally mailed to the driver stating the amount of bail due and if the option of traffic school is available,(normally not for violations 25 mph over the speed limit )and if a court appearance is mandatory.
A driver may enter one of three pleas at arraignment.
Not Guilty --The violation has to be proved in court or the case must be dismissed.
Nolo Contender-Basically the same as a guilty plea.
Guilty --(With or without an explanation)
Pleas are explained as well as the rights of a driver, and the options available to contest the ticket on the website
Speeding Ticket--Fighting or Plea Bargaining and one set up for CA. drivers --Help! I Got A Ticket!.
Certainly before any plea is entered Discovery can be requested by the driver. Typing in Discovery forTraffic Tickets on Google will bring up websites with info on how to request it.
Trial by Declaration , a written argument why the case should be dismissed can be obtained from a court clerk or by typing in Trial by Declaration on Google.
The prosecutor isn't involved in traffic infraction cases in CA. The officer is a WITNESS and the judge makes a ruling on the charge that the driver is in court for.
The insurance agent should be able to tell the driver if his insurance rates would increase if he were convicted of the violation he is charged with.

Best Regards,
Hey There
 

occharge

Member
A 22348(b) is not a misdemeanor, it is an infraction. Therefore, you will not be graced with the presence of a prosecuting attorney at your arraignment & Plea bargaining with a judge is not likely.

I said that to suggest that unless you plead "not guilty", or unless you hire an attorney, your choices are very limited.




My guess, is that the Judge will not offer you a reduced charge; you will not be allowed to attend traffic school (it is not be an option)... Furthermore, a license suspension is almost a must with a guilty plea... That will not only prompt an increase in your insurance premium but it might also cause a policy cancellation depending on your insurance carrier!

Lastly, where you a student before you decided to test the limits of the law and law enforcement's ability to charge you with such an offense?

I am always in awe of people who are fully aware of what they are doing and yet when they get caught, they claim the "student" status and suggest that they should get a break because of their inability to pay a fine or an increased insurance premium!!!
 

JIMinCA

Member
I agree with occharge. There will not be a prosecutor, so if he is to make any plea bargain, he will have to seek the prosecutor out ahead of time.

Or, there is always the option of fighting the ticket that has you charged with 3mph over......
 

You Are Guilty

Senior Member
I agree with occharge. There will not be a prosecutor, so if he is to make any plea bargain, he will have to seek the prosecutor out ahead of time.

Or, there is always the option of fighting the ticket that has you charged with 3mph over......
Doesn't one run the risk of cutting off their nose to spite their face if they do that?

i.e. "I'm not guilty of 103 in a 100, I wasn't going any faster than 99".

"OK, 22348(b) dismissed, have a nice day. But, before you leave, here's a ticket for 22349(a) - enjoy the fine as you've just admitted you're guilty."
 

JIMinCA

Member
nope... you are in court to answer the charge that has been brought against you. Once your case is dismissed, jeopardy is attached.
 

The Occultist

Senior Member
nope... you are in court to answer the charge that has been brought against you. Once your case is dismissed, jeopardy is attached.
I see you still don't understand how jeopardy works. If they bring completely new charges against the OP, then it is NOT the same as the old charges, and thus double jeopardy does not apply.
 

You Are Guilty

Senior Member
I see you still don't understand how jeopardy works. If they bring completely new charges against the OP, then it is NOT the same as the old charges, and thus double jeopardy does not apply.
Bah, beat me to it. Jim, you may want to brush up on your Constitutional Law. That's why you always need to be careful when using the "you cited me for the wrong offense" defense.

And I have Weird Al's "I Lost On Jeopardy" stuck in my head.
 

occharge

Member
Well, now that the double jeopardy class is over and done with, let me elaborate on this:
. . .
i.e. "I'm not guilty of 103 in a 100, I wasn't going any faster than 99".
1. He is not charged with going 103 in 100. He is charged with "exceeding 100mph" and the officer has estimated it at 103 (I'm not sure how).
2. He doesn't have to state how fast he was going. He only has to prove that he was NOT going 103... i.e. Create reasonable doubt that he was going 103mph.

. . .
"OK, 22348(b) dismissed, have a nice day. But, before you leave, here's a ticket for 22349(a) - enjoy the fine as you've just admitted you're guilty."
If that happens at his arraignment or even if it happens at his trial and considering the fact that for an infraction, an appearance by a prosecutor is not likely to happen, that statement cannot be said by the Judge (I'm sure you all know that a judge is their to "judge" not to prosecute). So that leaves the officer... If the officer decided to amend the charge right there in the court (WHILE ASSUMING THAT THE O.P. HAS ELOQUENTLY, & MASTERFULLY DEFENDED HIMSELF WITHOUT ADMITTING ANY GUILT) the the O.P. has managed to relieve himself of:
1. A possible license suspension (which is likely for a 22348(b) but not for a 22349(a)).
2. Two points on his license for 22348(b) (versus one point for 22349(a)). And...
3. He's reduced the $500+ fine that is suggested by 22348 to a mere $70 + penalty assessment for a 22349(a).

Quite an achievement if I may say so myself. . . [Or a great "win" as Zigner might claim!!!] LOL

Then if he has the time & the desire to fight the 22349(a) charge, ASSUMING ANYONE HAS A REASON TO CHARGE HIM WITH SUCH AN INFRACTION, he's got a minimum 50% chance of walking away from that too...

Then again. Its much easier to say "YOU ARE GUILTY (no pun intended), pay the fine, take the two points and the suspension..."
 
Last edited:

You Are Guilty

Senior Member
Your logic leaves something to be desired.
1. He is not charged with going 103 in 100. He is charged with "exceeding 100mph" and the officer has estimated it at 103 (I'm not sure how).
1.
OP said:
I was given a ticket under 22348(b) for exceeding 100 mph [highlight](cited at 103 mph)[/highlight]
Last I checked, 103 > 100, so yes, he was charged with going 103.
2. He doesn't have to state how fast he was going. He only has to prove that he was NOT going 103... i.e. Create reasonable doubt that he was going 103mph.
2. Well, true in that there's no "requirement" that he state his actual speed. However, assuming the officer properly substantiates the 103 speed (method irrelevant), then just how do you propose the OP create that "reasonable doubt"? Just saying "I wasn't going 103" is not going to cut it once the officer properly testifies. (Particularly in a case where the speed is over 100mph - judges tend not to look kindly on such drivers).
If the officer decided to amend the charge right there in the court (WHILE ASSUMING THAT THE O.P. HAS ELOQUENTLY, & MASTERFULLY DEFENDED HIMSELF WITHOUT ADMITTING ANY GUILT) the the O.P. has managed to relieve himself of:
1. A possible license suspension (which is likely for a 22348(b) but not for a 22349(a)).
2. Two points on his license for 22348(b) (versus one point for 22349(a)). And...
3. He's reduced the $500+ fine that is suggested by 22348 to a mere $70 + penalty assessment for a 22349(a).
...
Then if he has the time & the desire to fight the 22349(a) charge, ASSUMING ANYONE HAS A REASON TO CHARGE HIM WITH SUCH AN INFRACTION, he's got a minimum 50% chance of walking away from that too...
Well, the officer actually has up to one year from the offense to file the charges, and if the judge does dismiss the original charge, it's entirely possible the officer will be "mad" enough to go and file the new ticket. Then again, he might not, so there's nothing to lose by trying with the big caveat of the OP having "masterfully defended himself without admitting any guilt" (IMO, most laypersons will not be able to do that).

Hmmm. On the other hand, perhaps by deliberately putting his foot in the mouth on the (b) ticket, the OP can (deliberately) get charged with the (a), thus creating his own informal plea deal (assuming one isn't offered). Obviously, the (a) penalties are preferable to the (b)'s.
 

JIMinCA

Member
I see you still don't understand how jeopardy works. If they bring completely new charges against the OP, then it is NOT the same as the old charges, and thus double jeopardy does not apply.
Well, smart guy, maybe you can explain it to me. By your definition, I could be charged with murder, win in court, and then have the prosecution charge me with manslaughter. That is the exact same thing.


This ticket is a bogus ticket. Any reasonable cop would have charged the OP with 22349. He is simply charged with 3mph over wrt 22348.


If I was driving 68 in a four lane highway with a posted speed limit of 45, a reasonable cop wouldn't charge 22349(a), he would charge 22350. This is exactly the same thing. I agree that the OP is guilty of committing an offense, but he could easily raise reasonable doubt against the 22348 charge. And that is the ONLY charge he needs to defend himself against.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top