Arizona - Speeding in a School Zone

[ts_38]

What is the name of your state? Arizona

I was recently ticketed for speeding in a school zone. I saw the crossing guard pulling down the signs and I thought that meant the 15 mph school zone was over and I could resume normal street speed (30 mph). I was ticketed for going 27 mph in a 15 mph zone.

The officer stated that there were children still present in the area. I didn't think it would help to argue with him at this point but if there were children still present in the area, then the crossing guard would not have been pulling down the signs.

Several days after receiving the ticket, I looked at it again and I can see on the bottom where he made notes to himself (it came through on the duplicate copy) he wrote down "all signs up" and "children present." I thought it might help if the crossing guard would write a letter explaining that she wouldn't have been taking the signs down if there were children but she doesn't want to get involved.

I have a court date next month for this ticket. I have a feeling that because of what the officer wrote in his notes, it will come down to "he said, she said" and I'll end up not only having to pay the fine but having the points on my license. Does anyone see anything differently or should I just prepare myself for this outcome?

 

[racer72]

Your state law specifies that school zones speed limits are in effect anytime children are present and school is in session. The signage issue is a moot point. A letter from the crossing guard is useless, the prosecution cannot cross exam a letter. Another point, Arizona has a zero tolerance to speeding in school zones, you can be cited for going 16 mph.

 

[ts_38]

School was NOT in session - the release time was 25 minutes previous to when I was stopped. Does that make any difference?

 

[fairisfair]

as long as any of the signs are in place, you are required to abide by them. Do you think when the bell rings at 3:00 the children are magically whisked away? That is when they are trying to get home. Good luck, AZ judges are not sympathetic to any violators of school zones. Whether it is speeding, passing, whatever.

 

[Zigner]

School was NOT in session - the release time was 25 minutes previous to when I was stopped. Does that make any difference?

You're gonna be mad when you check what the legal definition of "in session" is for school zones

 

[ts_38]

as long as any of the signs are in place, you are required to abide by them. Do you think when the bell rings at 3:00 the children are magically whisked away? That is when they are trying to get home. Good luck, AZ judges are not sympathetic to any violators of school zones. Whether it is speeding, passing, whatever.

No, the children are not magically whisked away when the bell rings at 3:05. However, this was at 3:25 and the crossing guard does not start pulling up the signs until she sees there are no more children in the area.

 

[ts_38]

You're gonna be mad when you check what the legal definition of "in session" is for school zones

I've been trying to find just exactly what that is.

ARS 28-797 section E states: "For the purposes of this section, "school in session", when used either in reference to the period of time or to signs, means during school hours or while children are going to or leaving school during opening or closing hours."

And section D states: "When the school crossings are established, school authorities shall place within the highway the portable signs indicating that school is in session. This placement shall be not more than three hundred feet from each side of the school crossing. In addition, portable "stop when children are in crosswalk" signs shall be placed at school crossings. School authorities shall maintain these signs when school is in session and shall cause them to be removed immediately when school is not in session."

It seems kind of vague to me just when they consider "in session" to be. Unless there's something in another statute that I'm missing.

 

[ts_38]

Thanks for all of your replies. I felt there was a gray area since signs were coming down and no one but the officer seemed to see any children in the area. I didn't think there was any out and I'm well aware of how strict the judges are but I thought I'd see if anyone knew any differently. If I sped through during actual school hours or when the crossing guard was at her post, then I feel I would have earned that ticket. But I honestly thought that with the signs coming down that it meant the end of the school zone. Apparently if I'd been on the northbound side of the street it would have been but as I was southbound and the sign was still up on that section, it wasn't. Chalk this up as a very expensive lesson learned.

 

[trieroffact]

I've been trying to find just exactly what that is.

ARS 28-797 section E states: "For the purposes of this section, "school in session", when used either in reference to the period of time or to signs, means during school hours or while children are going to or leaving school during opening or closing hours."

And section D states: "When the school crossings are established, school authorities shall place within the highway the portable signs indicating that school is in session. This placement shall be not more than three hundred feet from each side of the school crossing. In addition, portable "stop when children are in crosswalk" signs shall be placed at school crossings. School authorities shall maintain these signs when school is in session and shall cause them to be removed immediately when school is not in session."

It seems kind of vague to me just when they consider "in session" to be. Unless there's something in another statute that I'm missing.

These posters are not reliable they always play devils advocate and apologists for law enfoircement officers that go well beyond the scope and intent of the law...

From a legal standpoint "reasonable doubt" is going to be raised if in reality the children had departed and the legal signs to enforce the school speed zone were being removed - you can question the officer specifically on this point asking some very direct questions and also bring your own evidence - pics of the area at the same time... the officer may or may not not be as comfortable saying the signs were in place under oath while testifying...in any event there is reasonable doubt that the actual crime as stated in the statute actually occured - go in and make your case you have little to lose (court fee) and much to gain for probation or a dismissal - $1000's in insurance premium savings...