cited though child was restrained

[mylostone]

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

I was cited with CVC 27360.5(a) Child Passenger Restraint System.

My five year old daughter WAS BUCKLED.

While I was at a stop light, the officer saw her from an adjacent parking and later claimed she was standing up. She says she was sitting down, but was leaning forward touching the back of my seat ( I couldn't really see her as she was directly behind the driver's seat ... but her three year old sister who was also in the car concurred). She had NOT removed the shoulder strap; she had simply leaned forward.

When I asked the officer for clarification of the details that brought this to the level of a violation, he simply repeated mantra-like, "child was improperly restrained." My daughter was visibly shaken, even though I assured her she had done nothing wrong.
This was totally bad PR for law enforcement; I'm certain the both of my daughters will be more skeptical of police officers because of this. I know I am.

What am I supposed to do with this? She was buckled?!

Thanks,
Mylo

 

[Zigner]

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

Were you cited for restraining the child?

(more info please)

 

[I_Got_Banned]

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

I was cited with CVC 27360.5(a) Child Passenger Restraint System.

My five year old daughter WAS BUCKLED.

While I was at a stop light, the officer saw her from an adjacent parking and later claimed she was standing up. She says she was sitting down, but was leaning forward touching the back of my seat ( I couldn't really see her as she was directly behind the driver's seat ... but her three year old sister who was also in the car concurred). She had NOT removed the shoulder strap; she had simply leaned forward.

When I asked the officer for clarification of the details that brought this to the level of a violation, he simply repeated mantra-like, "child was improperly restrained." My daughter was visibly shaken, even though I assured her she had done nothing wrong.
This was totally bad PR for law enforcement; I'm certain the both of my daughters will be more skeptical of police officers because of this. I know I am.

What am I supposed to do with this? She was buckled?!

Thanks,
Mylo

If you'd had tinted windows, it would have been more difficult for the officer to see inside your vehicle!

Oh, wait... Tinted windows are illegal too!
Sorry...

Seriously though, chances are, the testimony of your 5 year old and your 3 year old will NOT get any sort of recognition opposite that of the officer. And rather than subject them to the reality of how the legal justice system works, I suggest that you just pay the fine & carry on.

Also, & I could be wrong about this but I don't think that your violation is eligible for traffic school. Sorry again!

 

[Zigner]

CVC
27360.5. (a) No parent or legal guardian, when present in a motor
vehicle, as defined in Section 27315, may permit his or her child or
ward who is six years of age or older, but less than 16 years of age,
or who is less than six years of age and weighs 60 pounds or more to
be transported upon a highway in the motor vehicle without properly
securing the child or ward in an appropriate child passenger
restraint system or safety belt meeting applicable federal motor
vehicle safety standards.


Is your child over 60 lbs?

 

[mylostone]

Zigner: she weighs less than 60 pounds (I'm pretty sure)

"I Got Banned": Um, thanks for the reply, but do I understand you correctly that you think it is a better lesson to simply submit whimperingly to an unjust mis-application of the law rather than stand up against revenue generation bullies behind a badge?

Besides, this will put a point on my record thus increasing my insurance rates (I haven't even been pulled over in more than ten years),

and I'll have to pay a hefty fine (first offense: $100)

AND ... SHE WAS BUCKLED!!

 

[ajkroy]

Was she in a car seat or passenger restraint suitable for children under 60 pounds? If so, how would she be able to reach the back of your seat?

 

[I_Got_Banned]

"I Got Banned": Um, thanks for the reply, but do I understand you correctly that you think it is a better lesson to simply submit whimperingly to an unjust mis-application of the law rather than stand up against revenue generation bullies behind a badge?

Unfortunately, yes!!! Just my opinion.

and I'll have to pay a hefty fine (first offense: $100)

Uhm... I hate to be the bearer of more bad news but that $100 fine & after adding the penalty assessment will translate into (depending on which county you court is in) approximately $340 fine

AND ... SHE WAS BUCKLED!!

I believe you, I swear, I do!

 

[mylostone]

ajkroy: She was in a booster seat appropriate for her age and weight.

As to how she was leaning forward: The shoulder strap in the back seat of my car (1998 Volvo S70) doesn't "lock in" unless there is a severe deceleration. She was apparently leaning forward with her hands above her head and can easily reach the back of my seat; she can also easily reach the back of my seat with her feet when she is seated normally (I sometimes feel her feet against the back of the seat)

 

[JIMinCA]

Personally, I think you do NOT simply roll over and give in just because someone with a badge made an accusation. I think it is cowardly and irresponsible to suggest that you do so. Go to court. Stand up for your rights. If you are convicted, you won't be the first innocent person it has happened to... but you don't just quit. With that silly, defeatist attitude, you would think that some members of this forum would simply give their TV to a street thug since "he is just going to steal it anyway".

 

[Dougthegreat]

I would suggest you go to court and make the officer actually testify as to what he think he saw. Even though it may eventually come down to "your word against his", you should have an opportunity to ask the officer if he actually observed that your child was unrestrained - I mean, it's not like you can just hurry up and buckle one of those car seats if you get pulled over, because I've never seen one that wasn't a total PITA to get buckled. He takes an oath to tell the truth and the whole truth, and is additionally asked by the judge in each case if the facts are true and accurate as presented (at least in VA), so he cannot simply make things up. Do not ask him if he observed that your child was improperly restrained - build your case. Ask first if he observed that your child was not bucked in, and go from there.

I have observed that similar citations were dismissed in my local General District court when the officer could not testify that he actually observed that the child was unrestrained. Maybe we just have some lenient judges here

 

[Zigner]

I would suggest you go to court and make the officer actually testify as to what he think he saw. Even though it may eventually come down to "your word against his", you should have an opportunity to ask the officer if he actually observed that your child was unrestrained - I mean, it's not like you can just hurry up and buckle one of those car seats if you get pulled over, because I've never seen one that wasn't a total PITA to get buckled.

This wasn't a car seat...it was a "booster" seat. They take the same amount of time to buckle as the seatbelt by itself. Particularly for a child who is standing up when she's not supposed to be

 

[mylostone]

In my case it is difficult to buckle the booster seats. I have three car seats in the back seat. In the middle is an infant car seat "snap-in cradle"(?) for my six-month-old. Then there are two booster seats, one on each side of the infant seat. This is a tight squeeze, and it makes it non-trivial to buckle the older two in their booster seats. So, not only did I NOT buckle her WHILE I was pulling over (she had been buckled the entire time), it would have been impossible for me to do so without getting completely out of the car and opening the back door.

 

[I_Got_Banned]

you should have an opportunity to ask the officer if he actually observed that your child was unrestrained

And given that opportunity, you can rest assured that the officer will say that he did!

In his opinion, when he saw the child reaching forward to grab the back of the front seat, that child was, again, in his opinion, not properly restrained.

I mean, it's not like you can just hurry up and buckle one of those car seats if you get pulled over, because I've never seen one that wasn't a total PITA to get buckled.

I bet you that the officer is aware of that. He made the stop and even after seeing that the child was in a booster seat with the seat belt buckled around her, he still wrote a citation charging the OP with failure to "properly restrain a child who is under 6 years old & under 60 lbs".

If he was hard nosed enough to write the citation, you can bet that his testimony will reflect that same attitude and opinion.

He takes an oath to tell the truth and the whole truth

Hahahaha... Yeah... And?

and is additionally asked by the judge in each case if the facts are true and accurate as presented (at least in VA)

Not in California!

so he cannot simply make things up.

What's to stop him?

I have observed that similar citations were dismissed in my local General District court when the officer could not testify that he actually observed that the child was unrestrained. Maybe we just have some lenient judges here

Maybe you do... I can tell you that the general consensus here in California is to offer no leniency to those who are charged with failure to properly restrain a child. I have seen Judges who had no issue reducing fines for any other violation stick to the stated amount when it came to this specific violation.

That is why we have a higher penalty for 2nd time and 3rd time offenders.

That is why offenders are not offered the opportunity to go to traffic school to have the violation dismissed subsequent to completion.

Unfortunately for the OP, it happened to fall in that questionable area where the child is restrained and yet was still able to move somewhat freely.

Feel free to exercise your given right to plead not guilty and by all means, take it to trial. Hopefully the officer will not show up & you'll have a dismissal. But to assume that by questioning him you'll have any sort of reprieve, I highly doubt it.

Moreover, to suggest that just by fighting it just for the sake of fighting it, to spend any time preparing for a battle you're gonna lose, knowing that the end result is that you will not feel any better about writing that check is not only idiotic, it is unreasonable and nonsensical to say the least.

 

[CdwJava]

Being "buckled" is NOT the same as being properly restrained within the meaning of the section.

27360.5. (a) No parent or legal guardian, when present in a motor
vehicle, as defined in Section 27315, may permit his or her child or
ward who is six years of age or older, but less than 16 years of age,
or who is less than six years of age and weighs 60 pounds or more to
be transported upon a highway in the motor vehicle without properly
securing the child or ward in an appropriate child passenger
restraint system or safety belt meeting applicable federal motor
vehicle safety standards.​

A "booster seat" does not generally meet the standards. You may want to bring in a photo and description of the device to show that it does meet the standard (assuming it does). But, by itself, a "booster seat" is not going to be sufficient if the child is under 6 years old or under 60 lbs. An appropriate "child passenger restraint" pursuant to this section is generally considered to be what is commonly referred to as "a baby seat".

But, if you can show the court that the device was appropriate, they might just let it go.

- Carl

 

[justalayman]

hold it.

got it.

My five year old daughter WAS BUCKLED.

Zigner: she weighs less than 60 pounds (I'm pretty sure)

27360.5. (a) No parent or legal guardian, when present in a motor
vehicle, as defined in Section 27315, may permit his or her child or
ward who is six years of age or older, but less than 16 years of age,
or who is less than six years of age and weighs 60 pounds or more to
be transported upon a highway in the motor vehicle without properly
securing the child or ward in an appropriate child passenger
restraint system or safety belt meeting applicable federal motor
vehicle safety standards.

Carl. do you have a statute for children under 6 years of age and under 60 lbs.?

It would seem this is not the proper statute for this situation.

So, does that mean she can argue not guilty? or do they amend and charge her with the proper statute which I presume required an actual child safety seat that meets all sorts of standards.