22450(a) CVC question

[Silverbolt]

What is the name of your state? California
Violation: 22450a CVC

There is an exit lane off of the freeway that I was taking. This specific exit lane makes a big "U" turn onto the main street. There is an island with trees and bushes. The stop sign and cross walk are tucked in deep behind the island, but the lane has about 135 feet of merging into the main street. My front bumper was a few feet before the limit line when I made a complete stop, which made it harder for me to be seen, and also hard for me to see traffic. I proceeded to roll forward and slowed down in the merging lane to gauge traffic before finally merging on.

The CHP police officer was in the group of cars I was merging into. He was three cars behind me. From what he saw, he was only able to see me after the stop sign, and me moving through the merging lane... and my movements in the merging lane looks like a "california stop", or a rolling stop. He didnt see that I stopped behind the stop sign 5 feet back.

Below is a visual. I was in the orange, and stopped behind the yellow... which leaves me a little hidden behind the island (blue), especially considering where the officer was at (somewhere around the three black squares).
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v6...t/Atlantic.jpg

Here is another angle thats closer to the officer's perspective. Even though the island in blue looks flat, there are trees and bushes there.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v6...Atlantic2a.jpg

Questions:
1) I understand that if your front tires are on the limit line, then thats a 22450a violation. But is there a distance that is considered too far, before stopping at the limit line?

2) With all the information provided, is there any suggestions or advice on how I should fight this ticket?

[Zigner]

My first question is: WHY was your front bumper "a few feet behind" the limit line?

[Silverbolt]

Originally Posted by Zigner

My first question is: WHY was your front bumper "a few feet behind" the limit line?

I was actually forced to stop there since I was waiting behind a couple cars ahead of me, that were trying to merge on. The pick-up in front of me rolled through the cross walk, and his back tire stopped a little past the limit line. So when I made my stop, my bumper was right behind him, which was just a few feet behind the limit line.

[Zigner]

Originally Posted by Silverbolt

I was actually forced to stop there since I was waiting behind a couple cars ahead of me, that were trying to merge on. The pick-up in front of me rolled through the cross walk, and his back tire stopped a little past the limit line. So when I made my stop, my bumper was right behind him, which was just a few feet behind the limit line.

That's what I thought. You did not properly stop. After the vehicle in front of you went, you should have moved forward to the limit line and then stopped again.
Think about it. If the car in front of you is at a stop sign and then goes, you can't just go through the stop sign saying "I stopped back there"

[CdwJava]

Originally Posted by Silverbolt

1) I understand that if your front tires are on the limit line, then thats a 22450a violation. But is there a distance that is considered too far, before stopping at the limit line?

CVC 22450 requires that the driver of any vehicle approaching a stop sign stop at the limit line, if marked, otherwise before entering the crosswalk on the near side of the intersection. Stopping 15' feet before the line is NOT complying with the section.

2) With all the information provided, is there any suggestions or advice on how I should fight this ticket?

I'd say that about all you have is the officer's alleged inability to see the limit line from his vantage point. However, if he testifies that he DID see the line and saw you roll right past it without stopping, your done.

Keep in mind that in most CA traffic courts, Traffic School is only an option if you do not go to trial. Most courts will remove that as an option if you take the stand at trial.

- Carl

[Silverbolt]

I should have been more specific with explaining the distance. My front bumper was less than 5 feet from the limit line. The length from the back of a pick-up truck to the tire is only 3 feet, and his back tire was pass the limit line, inside the crosswalk. So when I made a complete stop, my front bumper was somewhere from 3 to 5 feet from the limit line. Does that comply with the section.

CVC 22450 requires that the driver of any vehicle approaching a stop sign stop at the limit line, if marked, otherwise before entering the crosswalk on the near side of the intersection.

So if someone just bought a new car, and is unfamiliar with the length and size of the car happens to stop 12 inches too short before the actual limit line... is that still a violation? Back to my original question.

1) I understand that if your front tires are on the limit line, then thats a 22450a violation. But is there a distance that is considered too far, before stopping at the limit line?

[Silverbolt]

Originally Posted by Zigner

That's what I thought. You did not properly stop. After the vehicle in front of you went, you should have moved forward to the limit line and then stopped again.
Think about it. If the car in front of you is at a stop sign and then goes, you can't just go through the stop sign saying "I stopped back there"

But what if the car ahead of me stopped inside the crosswalk, and I stopped behind him with only being 3 - 5 feet from the limit line? And if the vehicle in front of me wasnt there, it should really change anything. So if I stopped a little over an arm's length away from the limit line, is that really considered "too far?" If so, what is the acceptable distance to stop from the limit line to not violate CVC 22450.

I did stop before the crosswalk, and I feel the word "at" is relative.

[Zigner]

Originally Posted by Silverbolt

But what if the car ahead of me stopped inside the crosswalk, and I stopped behind him with only being 3 - 5 feet from the limit line? And if the vehicle in front of me wasnt there, it should really change anything. So if I stopped a little over an arm's length away from the limit line, is that really considered "too far?" If so, what is the acceptable distance to stop from the limit line to not violate CVC 22450.

I did stop before the crosswalk, and I feel the word "at" is relative.

I think you will have to convince the judge that the expert testimony given by the state witness is not correct. Not impossible, but very difficult when it comes to a "judgement call" situation.

[CdwJava]

Yes, "at" CAN be relative. However, stopping too far behind it makes it far too hard to judge when the stop actually occurred. if you stopped too far back, then your actions may not be able to be reasonably predicted by vehicles which can be effected by your movement, and you may not be in a position to adequately observe oncoming traffic. In my experience "at" has generally been interpreted to mean that a bumper or wheel is on or within inches of the limit line - not within feet.

- Carl

[Hey There]

11-16-07
Silverbolt,

Discovery is available in Ca. This means that a driver cited for a traffic ticket infraction is entitled to a copy of the officer's notes, the front and back of the traffic ticket , a video if used, and all other information the officer plans to use at trial. A request for Discovery is made by the driver and delivered in person or mail by a person OTHER than the driver, to the officer who issued the ticket and to the D.A.
Sources on Discovery
1.Help! I Got A Ticket, a website on Google & Yahoo has a form to request Discovery which can be downloaded. Precise instructions on how to request Discovery are given.
2.How to file for Discovery as well as a form to do so, is available in a book published by NOLO and what to do if Discovery isn't provided.(Chapter10, pages 5 thru 8)
3.Going to Google and typing in Discovery for Traffic Tickets will bring up websites on the first page with instructions on how to file for Discovery as well as options on what to do if Discovery is not provided.
It is obvious that obtaining the information the officer intends to present in court is an advantage in preparing a defence and that information on how to do so can be obtined from more than a few sources.
Beyond Discovery
Information about fighting traffic tickets in Ca. from the time of the citation to appeal is found on the website Help! I Got A Ticket!
The book mentioned in #2, written by a lawyer, explains in detail the driver's options after receiving the ticket from filing for Discovery thru Appeal.( Chapter 10, page 3 ) explains why it is always the right of the defendant to plead not guilty.(Chapter11 pages 22 thru 25 ) gives sample questions to ask the officer at trial.

Some lawyers will give A free consultation or charge a modest fee $50.00.?This is another option as well asking the question you posed here through the E:mail address given on the Help! I Got A Ticket! site.

Do consider that it takes LESS time to stop twice than to stop once and have to argue how far back from the limit line a driver can be to be considered as stopped at the limit line.

Let us know how this goes.

Best Regards,
Hey There

[JIMinCA]

Originally Posted by CdwJava

Yes, "at" CAN be relative. However, stopping too far behind it makes it far too hard to judge when the stop actually occurred. if you stopped too far back, then your actions may not be able to be reasonably predicted by vehicles which can be effected by your movement, and you may not be in a position to adequately observe oncoming traffic. In my experience "at" has generally been interpreted to mean that a bumper or wheel is on or within inches of the limit line - not within feet.

- Carl

Carl,

I think this is some of that "cop bias" coming out. I think the OP will be fine if he can show he stopped 3 - 5 feet from the line. "Within inches" is a overinterpretation of the word "at". If you are going to be that strict, why give "inches"? Why not say "at is at"? If there is a judge out there that is so anal as to convict based on stopping 3 - 5 feet from the line vice inches then that judge is merely opening himself up to be overturned on appeal. I can't imagine a judge convicting for 3 - 5 feet, but even if he did, I'd bet good money that the DA's office wouldn't even file a brief in the appeal.

[JIMinCA]

Silverbolt,

Do what Hey There says. Ask for discovery NOW!! Go to the site he references... it is a great tool. Much better than any other ticket site.

With your discovery request, you will benefit one of two ways:
1) you'll get the discovery and you'll see the officer's notes. That way you'll have good opportunity to create your defense based on what HE saw.
2) the DA's office will ignore your discovery request and you can ask for a dismissal based on that fact. It really works.

BTW, nice graphics. Very persuasive.

[CdwJava]

Originally Posted by JIMinCA

I think this is some of that "cop bias" coming out. I think the OP will be fine if he can show he stopped 3 - 5 feet from the line.

Actually, it's the bias of experience coming out.

His version of 3 to 5 feet is probably a little further back than that.

Since the section says to stop at the limit line, that is the standard upon which an officer is expected to enforce it. Sure, a judge might feel that a stop that far back is appropriate. But, a stop that far back will very often render the point of stopping moot since it will mislead vehicles in cross-traffic as to his actions because they may well believe he will be stopping at the line as required by law. Hence, one reason why I believe the judges I have witnessed will rule against early stops and rolling stops.

As one who has spent a great deal of time in traffic court, my experience has been that "at" is interpreted as being pretty close to the line and NOT a few feet back from it.

Oh, and please note that the OP stated in his initial post that he stopped 15 FEET back from the sign and admitted to rolling through the stop. That's not even close.

- Carl

[JIMinCA]

Originally Posted by CdwJava

Actually, it's the bias of experience coming out.

His version of 3 to 5 feet is probably a little further back than that.

Since the section says to stop at the limit line, that is the standard upon which an officer is expected to enforce it. Sure, a judge might feel that a stop that far back is appropriate. But, a stop that far back will very often render the point of stopping moot since it will mislead vehicles in cross-traffic as to his actions because they may well believe he will be stopping at the line as required by law. Hence, one reason why I believe the judges I have witnessed will rule against early stops and rolling stops.

As one who has spent a great deal of time in traffic court, my experience has been that "at" is interpreted as being pretty close to the line and NOT a few feet back from it.

Oh, and please note that the OP stated in his initial post that he stopped 15 FEET back from the sign and admitted to rolling through the stop. That's not even close.

- Carl

I think that he said he stoped 15 feet before he could have been seen by the cop. He clarified that in a later post. But, this is all irrelevant here. It is, however, just the reason why he needs to request the Disocovery. If I were him, I'd want to know what the Officer's perspective was in writing this ticket BEFORE going to trial.

Also, the way cops enforce laws, does not always coincide with the way laws are written. Personally, I see the wording of this section of the VC to be pretty vague. Certainly it does not mean that stopping 2 inches behind the line is a violation. But, stopping the block before the line is not reasonable either. I think that if he can show that where he stopped, he had a good view and it was reasonable, he should be fine. If not, that's why God invented appellate courts!

[Silverbolt]

Wow, I love you guys! I've learned so much today. I havent payed for the ticket and pleaded not guilty yet, so I still have a good amount of time. Thanks again for helping me out. I'll post updates.