Is citation missing relevant information?

[jcondo82]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?
Pennsylvania

Today I recieved a citation for speeding (57 in a 40) and I know I wasn't going that fast (cruise control on 45) The citation says Enradd Wireless was used. I have been reading up on it here and see there is the possibilty for error as not being set up properly. Im not exactly sure if this is relevant or not, but on the citation the boxes 52(miles followed) 53(Miles timed) and 54(Seconds timed) are left empty. I can understaned 52 and 54 being empty but I have seen post on here where it says 5' or 3' for box 53. Shouldn't this box have something about how my speed was measured?? Would just like to know if they are supposed to be 3' apart and this box is empty who's to say they were or were not as far as they should be? Is there even a space requirement?

[Maestro64]

Good question, most all ENRADD tickets I saw and people I talked to about none of them actually recorded the distance between the sensor. Your correct there are two versions of the ENRADD unit one that have the sensors 5 ft apart which is the older non-wireless version. The newer wireless version I believe the distance is only about 2 ft.

I am not sure where this distance must be recorded I have never ran across any information one way or the other. Knowing how PA works relative to tickets and required information, i would say it would be splitting hairs. Also, if you research you will find out that PA only formally tested and approved the older 5 ft model there is no data on the newer model.

The only real error that can occur with this unit is if another car coming the other direction triggers the unit or broke the second beam before your car cross it.

Something to consider about ENRADD tickets many time there is more than one officer involved so the one who ran the ENRADD has to show as well as the one who wrote the ticket. Also, how much distance was there between the officer writing the ticket and the one operation the unit. It is usually pretty easy to get the ticket tossed if both officer do not show.

[seniorjudge]

And don't use the "cruise control" defense; it is senseless.

[area_man]

You may want to consider having the officer testify to EXACTLY how high above the road surface each beam was set. Then, if they actually give a number (it's very unlikely they made that measurement), asking how he/she measured the height of the invisible beam above the road in the region where you passed (not at the roadside where the devices are set up).

If they cannot answer those questions, ask them if it's true that the device can give bad readings if the beams are not at the proper height and alignment. If they say no, ask them to produce the training manual and show where it talks about bad readings being possible if the beams are not aligned properly.

Just a suggestion. I am not a lawyer.

[jcondo82]

Thank you for that advice, I was actually wondering that myself considering that one could be set off by the tire and the other by the front bumper which is about 1' ahead of the tire. I notice on the citation the speed equipment operator is the same as the officer, I figured as much because of the area (Avis, PA) has one cop patrolling 3 different twp./boro's (Avis, South Avis, Pine Creek, and Dunnstable,) Other than the certificates stating the equipment has been calibrated, is the officer required to be certified for the use of it as well?? Any possible advice in this matter will be greatly appriciated!!

[area_man]

That's exactly right re: bumper vs. tire trigger, IMO. If you make that argument in court, please let us know how it goes.

[Maestro64]

As far as I been able to find PA does not have training requirements to use any of the equipment. This may change down the road with the state considering locals being able to use radar, if that happen there will be training requirements. All that is required now is the equipment is approved by the state.

Area_man,

Do you have access to an ENRADD manual, since the state and police will not hand copies over since they are not require to comply with a discovery request for speeding tickets. Also, if the officer does not show with the manual asking him to show proper setup in the manual may not work in this guys favor.

[Maestro64]

I could be wrong in the training thing, Here is a link on PA smooth operator website to the ENRADD information one one of the documents it claim they have to trained and certifiied officers to operate the unit. According to this site PSP and PennDot was loaning ENRADD units to local police.

[url=http://www.pasmoothoperator.org/Resources.asp]Resources, PA Smooth Operator[/url]

[area_man]

Maestro,

Even if the officer does not have the manual with them, if the question is asked they will have to admit that the manual does admit that speed errors can occur if alignment is not right. If they do not admit that they will be opening themselves up to something much worse than losing a challenge to a citation .

[Maestro64]

Just found this, very good case law on ENRADD and Freedom of information request in PA.

[url]http://origin-www.courts.state.pa.us/OpPosting/CWealth/out/2365CD07_6-11-08.pdf[/url]

PA deny the guys request for all the documentation that was produced to approve the wireless version of the ENRADD unit. I am betting it was deny because they did not have it for the wireless unit. I found the test and approval documents for the non-wireless version from back in 1996. But the wireless unit just showed up one day on the approved equipment list. I think they just added and never did any certification as required by the state. I am obviously guessing but the fact PennDot appeal this all the way to the supreme court lends me to believe they did not have it.

[Maestro64]

Originally Posted by area_man

Maestro,

Even if the officer does not have the manual with them, if the question is asked they will have to admit that the manual does admit that speed errors can occur if alignment is not right. If they do not admit that they will be opening themselves up to something much worse than losing a challenge to a citation .

Actually the standard answer the police give to this type of question is, they do not recall. If they say that then you have to prove he should have known and did not.

It is great how you can not plead ignorance to the law but the police can, and you have the burden to prove they should have known.

[area_man]

Agreed, Maestro.

One approach to fighting an ENRADD ticket could also be to take advantage of some legislative sloppiness. The PA Code actually still has on the books a detailed test procedure for ENRADD EJU-91 that includes using a constant which applies to 5 foot spacing. Since the new ENRADD uses 3 foot spacing, one can argue that the calibration done using a 3 foot constant is not acceptable since it does not follow the procedure listed in the PA Code

If the motorist prints out the part of the PA Code that describes the calibration method for ENRADD EJU-91 and asks the Judge to take Judicial Notice of it, and then asks the officer to prove not only that the device was calubrated within the past 60 days, but was in fact calibrated according to the method shown in the Code, it should be a good defense.

If the office says he doesn't know if it was done to the method listed in the PA Code, judge should dismiss since you have the Code on your side.

If he says it WAS done according to the code, have him testify as to the spacing between beams. IF he says 3 feet, show that the legally mandated testing assumes devices with 5 foot spacing, so if a device passed the specified testing it would read incorrectly if it only has 3' spacing.

Good luck.

[area_man]

Maestro,

PennDOT denied all the requested materials as not being covered under RTKL, but did agree to provide the test results and device approval procedure. They did NOT agree to provide the actual decision/order approving the wireless device for use in PA, and that does raise some questions. That decision/order is clearly, in my opinion, covered by the RTKL despite the position of PennDOT or the decision by the Commonwealth Court. It's hard to understand why that would be withheld if it does exist.

The tests done (or at least the ones received) would not expose the kinds of accuracy problems associated with beam misalignment, so the whole approval process seems to lack the kind of independent critical analysis required to keep inaccurate devices from being approved.

Also, the approval process is such that the manufacturer itself writes the test procedure, so again there doens't seem to be the kind of independent and objective "gatekeeping" function in place that one would expect for an approval process.

[jcondo82]

Thanks for all the advice, it seems I will have a good defense when I go (date set to 10-24 I'll post how it went) Would you be able to point me in a direction to find some of these codes for calibration procedure? I've looked around and all I can find is that Enradd Wireless is approved. I also checked the smooth operators site, but is LEO required to follow that? Or is it just for people in the program? (sorry I am new to all this) Also on [url=http://www.enradd.com]ENRADD E N R A D D *MAIN PAGE*[/url] there is a section "On The Ticket" and it states:
If you received an ENRADD speeding ticket there are a few things that you might see on the ticket that you might not understand. " Miles Timed - 3' " The 3' (feet) is the length of the ENRADD sensors. " Speed Equipment Serial Number " This is the designated serial number to that particular ENRADD device. " Station Equipment Tested " This is the station identification number of the approved testing company. "Date Equipment Tested" - This date was the last time the equipment was calibrated and tested by a state approved speed timing company. Pending that these boxes are filled out correctly on the ticket, the department has shown that they have met their requirements in having the device in compliance with the law.
The last sentence of that states that they fill the boxes out it shows the dpt. has shown they met the requirements in having the device in compliance with the law. The Miles timed is blank on my ticket, anything official on that?

[area_man]

[url=http://www.pacode.com/secure/data/067/chapter105/s105.56.html]67 Pa. Code §*105.56.*Manner of calibration and testing.[/url]

the section on ENRADD is at the bottom.

i'm not a lawyer so i cannot say exactly how the judge will react to not having the distance on the ticket, but if the officer cannot testify that he or someone else actually measured the distance i don't see how they can testify what the distance actually was. even if they testify it was 3 feet, the test procedure in the PA Code says it expects a 5 foot distance.

good luck!