223481 b V.C. speed over 100mph Southern CA

[WCFC921]

What is the name of your state? California

hello on thursday night i was traveling north on the 5 freeway. there was no traffic/cars on the freeway so i steped on it ( stupid disision) the high way patrol pulled me over and booked my for 120 but they didnt have it on the radar. my question is what r gonna be my consequences? how much time will i loose my license for and how big of a fine ? this is my 1st ticket ever and i am a minor 17 ive had my liscence for 1 1/2 yrs?

 

[The Occultist]

The first link of a Google search for "california 22348" produced this information:

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.

You will be fined, and your license might be suspended. If it is, not longer than 30 days.

 

[WCFC921]

The first link of a Google search for "california 22348" produced this information:


You will be fined, and your license might be suspended. If it is, not longer than 30 days. Hope you've learned your lesson

o yea ive learned my lesson the police officer said the if i was convicted i would lose it for 7 yrs. was he just tring to scare me?

 

[The Occultist]

The code is up there for you to read and spells out second and third convictions. It states that a suspension WILL occur (as opposed to use of the word "may" under a first conviction), and it does not state a limit on the amount of time the suspension can last as it did with the first conviction. So yes, I'd say a 7 year suspension is possible. And I hope that did scare you!

 

[WCFC921]

The code is up there for you to read and spells out second and third convictions. It states that a suspension WILL occur (as opposed to use of the word "may" under a first conviction), and it does not state a limit on the amount of time the suspension can last as it did with the first conviction. So yes, I'd say a 7 year suspension is possible. And I hope that did scare you!

yes ive read 2nd and 3rd convictions but this is my 1st so only a max of 30 days not 7YRS

 

[The Occultist]

Correct, for a first offense it will not be 7 years, but it very well could be next time. I misread the post, and thought you had said the officer said if convicted again that it would be 7 years. That is my bad.

 

[WCFC921]

one more thing 1 if my friend was in the car and he also booked me for that too. i dont get why though ive already had my lisence for 1 1/2 yrs and my restrictions of driving anyone are gone. did the officer mess up? 12814.6 b VC

 

[The Occultist]

Did you get cited for 12814.6 b?

 

[JIMinCA]

What is the name of your state? California

hello on thursday night i was traveling north on the 5 freeway. there was no traffic/cars on the freeway so i steped on it ( stupid disision) the high way patrol pulled me over and booked my for 120 but they didnt have it on the radar. my question is what r gonna be my consequences? how much time will i loose my license for and how big of a fine ? this is my 1st ticket ever and i am a minor 17 ive had my liscence for 1 1/2 yrs?

What are your consequences? It depends... do you want to defend yourself or do you want to just pay your fine and be done with it? If you want to defend yourself, you should get your parents involved. They can come here with you and discuss possibilities of a defense as they likely will be required to go to court with you.

 

[Zigner]

there was no traffic/cars on the freeway so i steped on it ( stupid disision) the high way patrol pulled me over and booked my for 120 ...

If there was no traffic/cars on the freeway, how did you get stopped.
The point is that you were WRONG that there was no traffic/cars on the freeway. You drove at an unsafe speed and were cited for it. As a young/new driver, you still need to learn that the laws apply if no-one is around just as much as they do at other times.

 

[The Occultist]

the laws apply if no-one is around just as much as they do at other times.

Precisely! It's the vehicle you don't see that's the most dangerous!

 

[Zigner]

Precisely! It's the vehicle you don't see that's the most dangerous!

Funny thing is that it took me FOUR times posting that for it to stay there...someone's got a problem with the truth around here...

 

[JIMinCA]

Here is an interesting little defense. There is a big paradox in CA traffic law. In People v Carlucci, the court held that the absence of a prosecutor in a traffic trial does not present a denial of a defendant's right to a fair trial. However, CVC 40803 (b) states:

In any prosecution under this code of a charge involving the
speed of a vehicle, where enforcement involves the use of radar or
other electronic devices which measure the speed of moving objects,
the prosecution shall establish, as part of its prima facie case,
that the evidence or testimony presented is not based upon a
speedtrap as defined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section
40802.​

In Esteybar v. Municipal Court, the court held that "The prosecution of a case by the district attorney involves an exercise of executive power..."

The judge is a member of the judicial branch and is therefore not capable of performing an act of prosecution. The cop who testifies is there as a witness, nothing more and nothing less (as per People v. Marcroft)

So, since there is typically no prosecuting attorney present during traffic trials, there is a good argument that most speeding tickets could be dismissed based on failure to prosecute as per 40803(b).

This is a very interesting approach and I think it is only a matter of time before a presedence setting case is decided that supports such. When that happens, there will basically need to be a prosecutor present for all traffic cases. Until then, the defense is there for anyone who wishes to use it.

 

[WCFC921]

If there was no traffic/cars on the freeway, how did you get stopped.
The point is that you were WRONG that there was no traffic/cars on the freeway. You drove at an unsafe speed and were cited for it..

yea i no thats wat i was wondring 2 were the CHP came 4rm

 

[WCFC921]

What are your consequences? It depends... do you want to defend yourself or do you want to just pay your fine and be done with it?.

yea im gonna just gonna say guilty of speeding over 100 and pay the fine and wat ever else is needed. but i was still wondering y he sited me for 12814.6 b vc .. Violation of provisional. yes i did have my friend in the car but ive had my lisence for almost 2 yrs and my 12 month of restrictions are gone which now allows me 2 drive w/ people u 21. and i still don get why he booked me for that