CA resident - 47/30 in residential MN

[Schlag96]

I was back in MN recently where I grew up, and got a speeding ticket 47 in a 30 zone in Owatonna. It was a real dick situation. There is this huge hill, and they were at the bottom of the hill doing the mass-speed-trap-walk-out-into-the-street-and-flag-you-over-because-we-are-over-budget-this-month thing. He gave me what he said he clocked me at, which was 47 mph.

I'm not going to argue that I wasn't doing 47; I'm sure he's an honorable guy and everything. But It's frustrating because I've worked really hard since I've had kids 3 years ago to drive safely, and I am just starting to enjoy the benefits of it on my car insurance, and this very isolated incident happens.

Facts of the case:

1. I was driving alone in my mom's car, all the paperwork was in order.
2. They were running a speed trap at the bottom of a really long, steep hill (not that that matters legally)
3. It was a large (read: main) street in town with two lanes each way. In my town these are 45 mph streets so that's part of the reason my internal calibration was a little fast I think)
4. They got me for 47 in a 30
5. I live out of state so I am unable to return to go to court
6. I have family there that could possibly go and talk to people if needed, for what that is worth.

I would appreciate any advice you all have for

A) Minimizing the impact on my car insurance
B) Saving me cash on the ticket itself, though that is a lesser concern by far
C) Whether CA assesses points for violations in other states or any other minute details I may not know from the CA experts
D) Apparently I was clocked with TLE. What is TLE?

Thanks in advance for any advice you may have.

[racer72]

1. Not relevent
2. Your right, it doesn't matter.
3. You need to adjust your internal calibration. Looking for speed limit signs is the first step.
3. You can say that again.
4. Bummer.
5. You are the only person that can answer to the charges, or you can hire a local attorney to represent you. I would suggest hiring an attorney.

[Zigner]

Originally Posted by racer72

2. Your right, it doesn't matter.

The only reason he's right about it not mattering is that this wasn't a speed trap in the first place

[Schlag96]

My bad, I should have said "Thanks in advance for any useful advice."

Silly me for expecting advice on freeadvice.com.

Anyone have anything besides a +1 for me?

[racer72]

Originally Posted by Schlag96

My bad, I should have said "Thanks in advance for any useful advice."

Silly me for expecting advice on freeadvice.com.

Anyone have anything besides a +1 for me?

To get useful advice, you have to post enough information to give advice. You presented nothing in your post that suggests the ticket was not warranted. You didn't even list the statute for which you were cited. We are not local attorneys that know the local courts and what works and what doesn't work. Look at my posts to those that have asked questions related to the courts in my area, those folks have received a lot more information and why is this? Because I am aware of how my local courts work. All we can give in general legal answers to most questions. We are not mind readers and that mystical Free Advice crystal ball really doesn't exist. Based on your post, I gave you the best answer possible for your situation, hire a local attorney. If that is not a good enough answer, you get the same thing I tell my kids: Tough titty said the kitty, there's no milk today......

[tholt4]

2. They were running a speed trap at the bottom of a really long, steep hill (not that that matters legally)

It may indeed matter if MN has a statute like Georgia.

§ 40-14-9. Evidence obtained in certain areas inadmissible; use of device on hill


Evidence obtained by county or municipal law enforcement officers in using speed detection devices within 300 feet of a reduction of a speed limit inside an incorporated municipality or within 600 feet of a reduction of a speed limit outside an incorporated municipality or consolidated city-county government shall be inadmissible in the prosecution of a violation of any municipal ordinance, county ordinance, or state law regulating speed; nor shall such evidence be admissible in the prosecution of a violation as aforesaid when such violation has occurred within 30 days following a reduction of the speed limit in the area where the violation took place, except that this 30 day limitation shall not apply to a speeding violation within a highway work zone, as defined in Code Section 40-6-188. No speed detection device shall be employed by county, municipal, or campus law enforcement officers on any portion of any highway which has a grade in excess of 7 percent.

[Schlag96]

Originally Posted by tholt4

No speed detection device shall be employed by county, municipal, or campus law enforcement officers on any portion of any highway which has a grade in excess of 7 percent.

Thanks, my research indicates that MN doesn't have a similar regulation, but i'm going to try and find an officer in MN to confirm that.

(One would think that the officers wouldn't run their speed trap on a huge hill if there were regulations rendering their evidence inadmissible, but one can hope lol)

[Zigner]

Originally Posted by Schlag96

(One would think that the officers wouldn't run their speed trap on a huge hill ...

This was NOT a speed trap. Once you realize that, your options for a defense will be easier to understand.

[Schlag96]

Originally Posted by Zigner

This was NOT a speed trap. Once you realize that, your options for a defense will be easier to understand.

Call it whatever you want. It was a dick move setting up a mass-production line of speeding tickets at the bottom of a huge hill on a 4-lane residential street.

If only I had access to departmental emails that almost certainly discuss the city's budget shortfalls for that fiscal quarter.

Since I cannot appear in person, I guess I'll just pay it and consider it my annual out-of-state MN taxes.