Beating a Failure to Stop at a Red Light Ticket

[gussuk25]

This took place in Juneau Alaska. I was 50-100 ft. from an intersection going 45 when the light turned yellow. I entered a traffic intersection when the light was yellow, but it was red by the time I left the intersection. The cop wrote me a citation for running a steady red light and said that i admitted to it on the paper. I only admitted that it was red when i left the intersection. The cops up here don't attend court that much so I have that on my side. I was going to argue that the cop didn't interpret what I said correctly and that it isn't a violation to enter an intersection if it is a yellow light. Any other ideas on how to beat it?

 

[freedomminute]

The cop ...said that i admitted to it on the paper.

What does this mean? Did he write your statement down somewhere? You are probably entitled to Discovery but I don't know the specifics of that process in Alaska. This will get you the officer's notes. You have to see what he wrote down that he claims you said. If he wrote that you admitted to entering the intersection on red (not that there's any logic to you admitting that) then that's what he will testify to and it will be his word against yours. Which means you will be SOL. See if you can find out more about what he claims your statement to have been and post back here.

 

[HighwayMan]

The cops up here don't attend court that much so I have that on my side.

How would you know that? Are you a regular?

 

[gussuk25]

No previous experience with the cops, I've just had friends that have been involved with traffic violations and the cops have to attend court on their own time.

 

[gussuk25]

I told the cop that the light was red when I exited the intersection but yellow when I entered. But on my citation he wrote that I admitted to running a steady red light. Which I did not.

 

[freedomminute]

I told the cop that the light was red when I exited the intersection but yellow when I entered. But on my citation he wrote that I admitted to running a steady red light. Which I did not.

What exactly is written on your citation?

 

[gussuk25]

the cop wrote on the citation:
To Wit: Above vehicle drove through a steady red light @ Egan 10th St. upon contact W/^ he told me he knew he ran the red light.

those are his exact words on the citation

 

[Maestro64]

The problem you have is what he wrote, he just wrote you admitted to it, that could mean anything.

The law on running a red light is pretty simple, it only matters where the car was when it turn red, the law say that you must stop before the stop line at the beginning of the intersection and can not proceed past it once the light turns red. It does not say anything about being in the intersection. Once in the intersection you are allow to clear on red since it assumes you entered on yellow and nowhere in these laws does it say it is illegal to enter on yellow.

Next is the officer is a no show it usually means a dismissal since you do have a right to confront your accuser unless you waive that right in court.

 

[Zigner]

the cop wrote on the citation:
To Wit: Above vehicle drove through a steady red light @ Egan 10th St. upon contact W/^ he told me he knew he ran the red light.

those are his exact words on the citation

What code section were you actually charged with violating?

ETA: The officer states that he saw you run the red. Your statement is just icing on the cake and, even if it were ignored completely, you could (likely would) be found guilty of the offense based upon the evidence presented.

 

[Zigner]

The law on running a red light is pretty simple, it only matters where the car was when it turn red, the law say that you must stop before the stop line at the beginning of the intersection and can not proceed past it once the light turns red.

Can you post a cite to the applicable law for Alaska that supports your statement?

 

[freedomminute]

Unfortunately, you now have two burdens to overcome – what the officer will testify that he saw you do and what he will testify that you said admitting your guilt. Whether correct or not, it is likely that he will testify to both and it will be your word against his. Not a good situation to be in when you go to court and you will likely lose if your only defense is that 1. You didn’t do it and 2. You didn’t admit to it.

At this point I’d start looking to see if there is any other way to defend yourself. I’m not saying any of these will pertain to your situation or will be a valid defense, just some questions to start asking:

1. Did the officer cite you for the correct violation? Post here what specific code you’ve been charged with violating.
2. Was the traffic signal working correctly? Was the yellow signal timing set much lower than the timing set forth in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (Federal or Alaska versions) for the posted speed limit?
3. Is there any other independent evidence of your innocence such as witnesses (often not the best evidence) or video/audio from the officer’s police cruiser dash cam system (if it exists and you can get access to it)?

These are the types of things you should be thinking about since as stated above (by me and others) a defense of “I didn’t do it” (whether true or not) isn’t going to get you very far.

 

[HighwayMan]

...the cops have to attend court on their own time.

Hmm, I don't know about that.

If I didn't get paid I wouldn't go to court either.

I can see setting up the officers' court schedule so they go during regular work hours, but that's not always possible. Obviously they are not required to attend court. The agencies can't expect very much to get done if the cops have to work for free, even part time.

 

[Zigner]

See, the problem is that the only info *I* found doesn't actually mention anything about being in the intersection on the red/yellow, etc. That's why I would like the OP to let us know what code section he is accused of violating...

And, it would be nice if Maestro would post a cite to the law he is quoting (paraphrasing?)

 

[Zigner]

The officer *I* know LOVE going to court. It's all overtime!

 

[freedomminute]

I was 50-100 ft. from an intersection going 45 when the light turned yellow. I entered a traffic intersection when the light was yellow, but it was red by the time I left the intersection.

Not meaning to pile on you, but there’s something wrong here. At 45 mph you are traveling 66 ft/sec. If you were indeed a maximum of 100 ft from the intersection, and assuming you maintained a constant speed, it would have taken you only about 1.5 seconds to enter the intersection (and you would have reached the limit line or crosswalk before that). This should have been plenty of time and a reasonable person generally should not believe you to have run the red light. And the court will assume the officer is at least reasonable, if not very well trained to observe these things. Furthermore, even if the intersection was fairly large, say 75 ft wide, you would have left the intersection at 2.65 seconds. Yellow change intervals generally have durations of approximately 3 to 6 seconds with the longer intervals used for approaches with higher speeds (above 35 mph). Therefore, the light should still have been yellow when you left the intersection. Either you are wrong about your distance or your speed, the intersection is very wide (almost 100 ft for a 3 second yellow), or the yellow phase is much shorter than normal.