22348(B) VC Exceeding 100 MPH - 65 Zone

[SPORTcoupe]

What is the name of your state? California

A few weeks ago I was coming back to the Bay Area from Sacramento.
I was Westbound on the I-80 Highway(5 lane) at about 7:00 AM
Traffic was pretty light and I allowed myself to step on it a bit (always a mistake)
I was in the fast lane and passing a car that was in the slow lane, at a rate of about 15 mph when I noticed familiar looking colors entering the freeway about 1/8th of a mile behind me.
I immediately applied the brakes because I knew I was speeding and changed lanes twice(safely and using the blinker of course).
10 seconds later the CHP officer came flying up onto my bumper and another 10 seconds later, his lights went on.
When I pulled over, he asked for my license and registration and withouth another word, went to his car and wrote up a ticket.
He came back, handed me the ticket for signature. (Not a word)
I signed and returned it to him.
He tore off my copy and while handing it to me said "Slow it down. With the patches of black ice on the road, at 100 mph you don't have a chance" and walked away.
I was nervous and did not see what the violation was until after he left to his car.
There was no black ice. It was a pretty bright morning and a very decent tempereature.

The speed box says 101+ and I guess he paced me because there is nothing mentioned about radar.
I'm planning to contest by Written Declaration and am wondering what I can argue?
Like I said before, I was passing another car in the slower lane at about 15 mph when he saw me. Shortly thereafter I was already going 70.
Unless the other car was going 85(doubtfull), I was not doing 101+.
There was not enough time to pace me so any judgement of speed was probably based on the car I was passing.

Any advice?

Yes, I already know I'm a dip**** for speeding purposely.
Yes, I have learned a lesson and am a much more careful driver than before.
No, I don't need it rubbed in.

Thanks,
~Alan

[rmet4nzkx]

I used to drive that all the time and had to learn to pace myself as my speedometer was broken for a short time. Pretty much, if the traffic is light, then all the cars will be going 70-80, so passing anyone will stick out like a sore thumb. You can also see the CHP for some distance before hand and too late once they come after you, especially since you had to put on the brakes, taking your foot off the gas should have eased you back in with less show, but most likely you were already had. A couple of weeks ago it was down in the 30's, the other problem with that route is the fog, so there could have been black ice.
Fact is, you don't know how fast you were going, you were only worried about pasing the slow guy.

I think you should appear in person, in court.

CALIFORNIA CODES
VEHICLE CODE
SECTION 22348-22366
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.
(c) A vehicle subject to Section 22406 shall be driven in a lane
designated pursuant to Section 21655, or if a lane has not been so
designated, in the right-hand lane for traffic or as close as
practicable to the right-hand edge or curb. When overtaking and
passing another vehicle proceeding in the same direction, the driver
shall use either the designated lane, the lane to the immediate left
of the right-hand lane, or the right-hand lane for traffic as
permitted under this code. If, however, specific lane or lanes have
not been designated on a divided highway having four or more clearly
marked lanes for traffic in one direction, a vehicle may also be
driven in the lane to the immediate left of the right-hand lane,
unless otherwise prohibited under this code. This subdivision does
not apply to a driver who is preparing for a left- or right-hand turn
or who is in the process of entering into or exiting from a highway
or to a driver who is required necessarily to drive in a lane other
than the right-hand lane to continue on his or her intended route.

[JETX]

Originally Posted by SPORTcoupe

Any advice?

Yep. Pay your ticket by mail. Or maybe they will even take a credit card over the phone. Either will definitely save you a lot of time in that your guilty plea will mean you don't have to appear in court.
Oh, and slow down next time.

[rmet4nzkx]

Originally Posted by JETX

Yep. Pay your ticket by mail. Or maybe they will even take a credit card over the phone. Either will definitely save you a lot of time in that your guilty plea will mean you don't have to appear in court.
Oh, and slow down next time.

Ahhhh Jex,
Don't ya think he should at least get somehting for his money?

[SPORTcoupe]

Originally Posted by rmet4nzkx

A couple of weeks ago it was down in the 30's, the other problem with that route is the fog, so there could have been black ice.

I think you should appear in person, in court.

Thanks.

Yes, around Davis there was some pretty dense fog and I slowed down to about 60 mph because I really had trouble seeing even at 65, but about 10 miles up it was absolutely clear and visibility was at least a few miles.

The court is about 50 miles from my house so I have no intention of going unless I really need to.
If I lose the written declaration, then I will have to show up for a Trial de Novo but as long as paperwork usually takes to arrive, this will be a few months out.

Originally Posted by JETX

Yep. Pay your ticket by mail. Or maybe they will even take a credit card over the phone.

Heh. Thanks for the advice, but no-can-do. These days the only reason for people to plead guilty if for plea bargaining or the such.
I was not going over 101 and am therefore not guilty.
They can prove otherwise, but I'd be lying if I plead guilty.

~Alan

[JETX]

Originally Posted by SPORTcoupe

Heh. Thanks for the advice, but no-can-do. These days the only reason for people to plead guilty if for plea bargaining or the such.
I was not going over 101 and am therefore not guilty.
They can prove otherwise, but I'd be lying if I plead guilty.

Yeah, right!!!
Of course, you have a very high probability of the court believing your 'Your Honor, I wasn't driving THAT fast!!!" over the officers statements.

In my experience, most people who are truly innocent can't wait for their 'day in court' to prove their innocence. Your 'let's delay as long as possible' tells a lot!!

[SPORTcoupe]

Originally Posted by JETX

Yeah, right!!!
Of course, you have a very high probability of the court believing your 'Your Honor, I wasn't driving THAT fast!!!" over the officers statements.

And what are the officers statements?
"Ummmm.....yes he was." WoW! Defendant guilty, case closed.

If I thought the courtroom was anywhere close to fair, I'd show up on my court-date...in person, to prove my innocense.
Since the court is very biased and this is how they make their money, I am forced to find ways to cheat.

Anyways, all that is besides the point.
I thought this forum was for "legal advise" and so far all I got was rmet4nzkx's "I think you should appear in person, in court" and JETX's "just bend over and take it," neither of which I find to be very usefull.

I'll ask a more specific question then:
If I do lose the trial by Written Declaration and have to request a Trial de Novo, can I request that I be tried in my own county?
The reason I ask is that I wasn't very close to home when pulled over, and it's not very convenient for me to go this far to defend myself.
Usually the subject that is defending doesn't have to go anywhere.

Thanks for your thoughtfull replies so far,
~Alan

[CdwJava]

Originally Posted by SPORTcoupe

I'll ask a more specific question then:
If I do lose the trial by Written Declaration and have to request a Trial de Novo, can I request that I be tried in my own county?

You can "request" it, but it will be denied. The case will be heard in the original county as they have jurisdiction - not your home county.

Usually the subject that is defending doesn't have to go anywhere.

Probably because most the defendants are stopped in their home counties. If they were to try the case in your county, then the officer would have to travel - and that's an added expense to the state as well.

I wish that was the way it worked! I'd sit on the freeway running plates til I found someone from San Diego so I could get a free trip home for a while!

But, since your county does not have jurisdiction, it won't be tried there. Though, I suppose if you wanted to pay for experts to demonstrate to the court how you couldn't get a fair trial in the county of jurisdiction, you might be able to get it moved ... but even the attempt would cost you far more than the cost of the drive and time off work, I'm sure.


- Carl

[JETX]

Originally Posted by SPORTcoupe

so far all I got was rmet4nzkx's "I think you should appear in person, in court" and JETX's "just bend over and take it," neither of which I find to be very usefull.

Translation:
This website gave me accurate FACTUAL responses, but they are not what I want to hear, so I deem them not 'useful'.

[rmet4nzkx]

Originally Posted by JETX

Translation:
This website gave me accurate FACTUAL responses, but they are not what I want to hear, so I deem them not 'useful'.

We must not leave off that fact that he knew he didn't know how fast he was traveling, but that he was speeding and felt he needed to cheat the system. "I am forced to find ways to cheat." No one here is twisting your arm to cheat. We are not here to cheat the system.

[nextwife]

Originally Posted by SPORTcoupe

Yes, around Davis there was some pretty dense fog and I slowed down to about 60 mph because I really had trouble seeing even at 65, but about 10 miles up it was absolutely clear and visibility was at least a few miles.

IMHO, 60 is WAY too fast if it's foggy. There was a horrific pileup and fire about 30 minutes north of here three years ago. At 60 one would plow right into it.

[url]http://archives.cnn.com/2002/US/Midwest/10/11/interstate.crash/[/url]

CEDAR GROVE, Wisconsin (CNN) -- Dense fog combined with excessive speed apparently triggered the deadliest traffic accident in Wisconsin history Friday morning, killing 10 people in a fiery crash that involved more than three dozen vehicles and burned some of them beyond recognition.

While the investigation into the crash is continuing, Sgt. John Jones of the Wisconsin Highway Patrol said that at the time of the pileup, vehicles were still traveling down Interstate 43 at normal highway speeds despite nearly zero visibility -- pointing to a combination of driver error and weather as the likely cause of the tragedy.

"This scene looked like a junkyard fire," he said. At least 38 vehicles were involved at one major crash scene, where a fire erupted.

"Some vehicles were piled on top of each other," he said. "We located three vehicles inside of one of those trailers, just from the collision."

[SPORTcoupe]

Originally Posted by rmet4nzkx

We are not here to cheat the system.

No point in cheating the system when you are the system.

Legal advice should come from educated people who are un-biased in the matter.
A cop does not qualify for either, and as sad as this is, retired judges are as biased as it gets.
I said in my first post: I know I shouldn't have been speeding at all but I was. The experience has impacted my driving already; however, whether I pay a butt-load of money or not will have no impact on my driving habits.

I really don't see how traffic court is legal in the first place.
There is a reason they decided that a jury should come up with a verdict while the judge gives the sentence.

I'm just ranting now. Stupid, stupid politics. Can't even drive in peace.

~Alan

P.S. I agree that even 60 might have been a bit too fast for dense fog, but I was in the 2-nd to slowest lane, and people were still passing me slowly, but surely.
On the other hand, going too slow in foggy conditions is about as bad as going too fast.
I would rather be the 15th car in a 30+ car pileup and burn to death, than be the guy that was going slow and got rearended causing a 30+ car pileup where 10 people die and numerous others are crippled, and each and every one of the family members is convinced that it was I that caused the initial accident.

[CdwJava]

Originally Posted by SPORTcoupe

Legal advice should come from educated people who are un-biased in the matter.

Well, technically, it can only come from lawyers. Everything else is sheer speculation and opinion.

A cop does not qualify for either, and as sad as this is, retired judges are as biased as it gets.

Cops are neither "educated" nor "un-biased"?

Huh ... how odd. I'll have to tell my fellow collegiate cops that we are uneducated and un-biased

I really don't see how traffic court is legal in the first place.
There is a reason they decided that a jury should come up with a verdict while the judge gives the sentence.

Unless you face jail time, a jury trial is not required.

P.S. I agree that even 60 might have been a bit too fast for dense fog, but I was in the 2-nd to slowest lane, and people were still passing me slowly, but surely.

Having witnessed a couple such deadly pile-ups, and having driven that stretch of I-80 quite a few times - even in dense fog, I can tell you that 60 MPH WOULD be way too fast in some situations.

I'd be over in the number 4 lane (2nd from the right) if I could ... that way I'd avoid the serious speedsters, and I should be able to see the merging traffic from the right.

And if it were TOO foggy, then it's time to get off the road and enjoy an afternoon of shopping, a movie, or some other recreation.

I'd prefer to get to my destination alive and late then dead and not at all.

Oh, and I live in the valley ... fog here is a way of life. So maybe I'm just experienced with dealing with it.

- Carl

[SPORTcoupe]

Originally Posted by CdwJava

I wish that was the way it worked! I'd sit on the freeway running plates til I found someone from San Diego so I could get a free trip home for a while! - Carl

This is the sad part: If you could do it, you would do it. The term "Peace Officer" is about as oxymoronic as saying "Military Intelligence" or "The U.S. Department of Justice"
Are you proud of what you do?
As fun as it would be to live outside the law, I would feel no better than the Mortuary Salesperson pushing out caskets at $5000/piece.
You're ripping off hard-working people who are trying to get to work on time.

I love venting. =Þ

Take care,
~Alan

[rmet4nzkx]

Originally Posted by SPORTcoupe

No point in cheating the system when you are the system.
I'm not the system!

Legal advice should come from educated people who are un-biased in the matter.
I'm not biased, I'm educated, I'm not a cop or a judge. Funny thing I got a speeding ticket in the same jurisdiciton as you and the cop showed up AND I won! Guess I know somehting.

A cop does not qualify for either, and as sad as this is, retired judges are as biased as it gets.
I said in my first post: I know I shouldn't have been speeding at all but I was. The experience has impacted my driving already; however, whether I pay a butt-load of money or not will have no impact on my driving habits.

I really don't see how traffic court is legal in the first place.
There is a reason they decided that a jury should come up with a verdict while the judge gives the sentence. Trust me, you are better off with a judge and not a jury. If we had to provide juries for speeding tickets there wouldn't be time for anything else.

I'm just ranting now. Stupid, stupid politics. Can't even drive in peace.
Don't speed and you will have many more peaceful miles!
~Alan

P.S. I agree that even 60 might have been a bit too fast for dense fog, but I was in the 2-nd to slowest lane, and people were still passing me slowly, but surely.
On the other hand, going too slow in foggy conditions is about as bad as going too fast.
I would rather be the 15th car in a 30+ car pileup and burn to death, than be the guy that was going slow and got rearended causing a 30+ car pileup where 10 people die and numerous others are crippled, and each and every one of the family members is convinced that it was I that caused the initial accident.

You were driving too fast the whole way, if it is too foggy, they have three Malls and outlet stores or the back roads.