28-702.01.
C.If the maximum speed limit on a public highway in this state is fifty-five miles per hour, a person shall not drive a motor vehicle at a speed in excess of fifty-five miles per hour on that highway. If the speed at which the person is alleged to have driven as provided in section 28-707, subsection A or the speed at which the court finds the person drove is more than sixty-five miles per hour, the offense is designated as a civil traffic violation and the person is subject to a civil penalty of not more than the amount provided in section 28-1598.
Well, for your sake, lets hope that you get one of those state attorneys and/or judges.
OK, if you want to get technical, let me reword my comment to say regardless of how many miles above the speed limit you were driving, so long as the officer can articulate that your alleged speed was in excess of the posted limit, and by further assuming that he/she can articulate the the # of mph above the limit he charged you with falls outside the error rate of the machine with which he measured your speed, then he has likely met the burden of proving your guilt by legal standards.
Well, then you can argue to the judge that the definition of “approximate” which meets the “commercial credit” standards, should also apply in a court of law in regards to a "speed measurement".
And you are well within your constitutional rights to do just that. Just keep in mind that your accuser is the officer who signed the complaint against you (i.e., the citation). It was not signed by the machine.
And by that same logic, you cannot confront a non camera speed measurement obtained by Radar, Laser, Lidar, speedometer (pace) or whichever type of
Speed Measuring Device used in the issuance of a ANY speeding citation; nor can one confront a breathalyzer that measured the BAC in a DUI case; nor can one confront a machine that matched the DNA data to that of a murder suspect... I can go on and on but the point is, and as long as the courts in your state have taken “judicial notice” that those measurements are sufficiently accurate to meet the legal standard of establishing guilt, then your contention that you cannot confront a machine will NOT get you any closer to a "not guilty" verdict.
And so long as that method and frequency of calibration meets the procedural standards established pursuant to the NHTSA and the departmental standards established by the agency that issued the citation, then my guess is that the court will be satisfied with THOSE standards rather than with what YOU deem as a sufficient method/frequency of calibration.
Lastly, let me add that I it is not my place to sit here and suggest guilt or establish innocence. Ultimately, that is for the judge to do. You asked for thoughts or comments, and I have posted mine.
Please let us know how it works out! Good luck...
