cop didn't have his lights on

[mikejungle]

What is the name of your state?
California

i was driving home aruond 8 o'clockish and was cruising at around 70 mph most of the way. however, i sped up so that i could pass a car and merge onto another highway. there was a cop sitting right on the shoulder and i noticed him only as i passed because he didn't have his lights on. he tells me he clocked me at 82 which is probably a pretty accurate figure, but it was only while i was trying to pass that car.

my question is, is there any way that i can fight the ticket saying that he didn't have his lights on? isn't it illegal for a cop to do that? what is it called?

thanks

-Mike

 

[You Are Guilty]

What is the name of your state?
California

i was driving home aruond 8 o'clockish and was cruising at around 70 mph most of the way. however, i sped up so that i could pass a car and merge onto another highway. there was a cop sitting right on the shoulder and i noticed him only as i passed because he didn't have his lights on. he tells me he clocked me at 82 which is probably a pretty accurate figure, but it was only while i was trying to pass that car.

my question is, is there any way that i can fight the ticket saying that he didn't have his lights on? isn't it illegal for a cop to do that? what is it called?

thanks

-Mike

Depends. What color pants did he have on?

 

[racer72]

what is it called?

Good police work. Perfectly legal too.

 

[cepe10]

I believe Karl has already proven that the peace officer in question does have to have his lights on since he was on a public roadway and it was at least 30 minutes past dusk so it is illegal (and dangerous) for him to not have his lights on.

 

[cepe10]

24001. This division and Division 13 (commencing at Section 29000), unless otherwise provided, applies to all vehicles whether publicly or privately owned when upon the highways, including all authorized emergency vehicles.

24400. (a) During darkness and inclement weather, a motor vehicle, other than a motorcycle, shall be equipped with at least two lighted headlamps, with at least one on each side of the front of the vehicle, and, except as to vehicles registered prior to January 1, 1930, they shall be located directly above or in advance of the front axle of the vehicle. The headlamps and every light source in any headlamp unit shall be located at a height of not more than 54 inches nor less than 22 inches.

(b) As used in subdivision (a), "inclement weather" is a weather condition that is either of the following:

(1) A condition that prevents a driver of a motor vehicle from clearly discerning a person or another motor vehicle on the highway from a distance of 1,000 feet.

(2) A condition requiring the windshield wipers to be in continuous use due to rain, mist, snow, fog, or other precipitation or atmospheric moisture.

(c) This section shall become operative on July 1, 2005.

Added Sec. 2, Ch. 415, Stats. 2004. Effectve January 1, 2005. Operative July 1, 2005.

24401. Whenever any motor vehicle is parked or standing upon a highway any headlamp that is lighted shall be dimmed or on the lower beam.

 

[BelizeBreeze]

Oh brother. This is like telling the poster that the police cannot speed to catch up with a speeder.

this is NOT a legal excuse to have the ticket thrown out.

 

[You Are Guilty]

Uhoh!

No lights need be displayed upon a vehicle which is:
(a) Parked off the roadway and not in a hazardous position on the
highway;

(As if that wasn't enough, care to bet whether there's an exemption for authorized emergency vehicles in the Code?)

Of course, that still doesn't answer my original question...

 

[cepe10]

Uhoh!

(As if that wasn't enough, care to bet whether there's an exemption for authorized emergency vehicles in the Code?)

Of course, that still doesn't answer my original question...

(1) 24001 specifies energency vehicles.
(3) 24401 goes into this situation specifically. Whenever any motor vehicle is parked or standing upon a highway any headlamp that is lighted shall be dimmed or on the lower beam.
(2) The shoulder is part of the highway -the statute does not say out of the travelway nor does it intend it -especially with the engine running.
(3) Was your question supposed to be advice or research on the issue? if not why are you here?


To the OP look at a "trial by declaration" option on this one.

 

[You Are Guilty]

(1) 24001 specifies energency vehicles.
(3) 24401 goes into this situation specifically. Whenever any motor vehicle is parked or standing upon a highway any headlamp that is lighted shall be dimmed or on the lower beam.
(2) The shoulder is part of the highway -the statute does not say out of the travelway nor does it intend it -especially with the engine running.
(3) Was your question supposed to be advice or research on the issue? if not why are you here?

To the OP look at a "trial by declaration" option on this one.

I was going to ask if you really were this stupid, but then I took a look at some of your other posts, which answered my question.

Let's try it this way. If there was an officer parked on the side of the highway with no lights, no clothes, and strangling an underage hooker, he still can give a speeding ticket, and none of his other "activities" provide for a legal defense to it. You can cite code after code (which, despite your protestations, are inapplicable), but until you can grasp this basic tenet of vehicle law, I think you're the one who might want to stop giving "advice".

 

[fairisfair]

I believe Karl has already proven that the peace officer in question does have to have his lights on since he was on a public roadway and it was at least 30 minutes past dusk so it is illegal (and dangerous) for him to not have his lights on.

Perhaps you missed the SITTING ON THE SHOULDER part of the post??

C'mon Cepe10, we are all very familiar with your personal opinion of police officers by now, or as you like to call them LEO's. It is getting quite tiresome.

 

[Zigner]

24001. This division and Division 13 (commencing at Section 29000), unless otherwise provided, applies to all vehicles whether publicly or privately owned when upon the highways, including all authorized emergency vehicles.

24400. (a) During darkness and inclement weather, a motor vehicle, other than a motorcycle, shall be equipped with at least two lighted headlamps, with at least one on each side of the front of the vehicle, and, except as to vehicles registered prior to January 1, 1930, they shall be located directly above or in advance of the front axle of the vehicle. The headlamps and every light source in any headlamp unit shall be located at a height of not more than 54 inches nor less than 22 inches.

(b) As used in subdivision (a), "inclement weather" is a weather condition that is either of the following:

(1) A condition that prevents a driver of a motor vehicle from clearly discerning a person or another motor vehicle on the highway from a distance of 1,000 feet.

(2) A condition requiring the windshield wipers to be in continuous use due to rain, mist, snow, fog, or other precipitation or atmospheric moisture.

(c) This section shall become operative on July 1, 2005.

Added Sec. 2, Ch. 415, Stats. 2004. Effectve January 1, 2005. Operative July 1, 2005.

24401. Whenever any motor vehicle is parked or standing upon a highway any headlamp that is lighted shall be dimmed or on the lower beam.

Cepe, why do you insist on this sort of drivel??
The cop was PARKED. Lights aren't required to be on when parked.

 

[cepe10]

Perhaps you missed the SITTING ON THE SHOULDER part of the post??

C'mon Cepe10, we are all very familiar with your personal opinion of police officers by now, or as you like to call them LEO's. It is getting quite tiresome.

Again - THE SHOULDER IS PART OF THE HIGHWAY. You should leave the highway definitions to those with engineering degrees and licenses to practice engineering...

Just because their are several LEO apologists here who like to spout off about how they are above the law does not make their actions any more viable nor does it help those LEO's who do act in a professional and responsible manner with due regard to the law and public safety. Heck, I'm not nearly as biased, narrowminded, and cynical as those types.

BTW - Illinois just threw out about 150 convictions because the LEO's in those cases acted UNLAWFULLY.

 

[fairisfair]

Again - THE SHOULDER IS PART OF THE HIGHWAY. You should leave the highway definitions to those with engineering degrees and licenses to practice engineering...

Just because their are several LEO apologists here who like to spout off about how they are above the law does not make their actions any more viable nor does it help those LEO's who do act in a professional and responsible manner with due regard to the law and public safety. Heck, I'm not nearly as biased, narrowminded, and cynical as those types.

BTW - Illinois just threw out about 150 convictions because the LEO's in those cases acted UNLAWFULLY.

whatever...obviously you are no more an engineer than you are knowledgeable of the law. You are not required to have your lights on when on the shoulder of a roadway. IN FACT, in my state, you are to turn your lights OFF when pulling off and onto the shoulder of the roadway, ei. duststorms so that the traffic on the roadway does not follow tail lights off the highway.

 

[Zigner]

Again - THE SHOULDER IS PART OF THE HIGHWAY. You should leave the highway definitions to those with engineering degrees and licenses to practice engineering...

Fine, the shoulder is part of the roadway. According to the code sections YOU cited, it doesn't matter. The code you cited says that if a vehicle is parked/standing on a highway with it's lights on, they must be dimmed.
It does NOT say that the lights HAVE to be on.

 

[LSCAP]

The answer in all this mishmash is apparent. HUH?

When you go to court, you usually have an opportunity to talk to the DA.

In some courts that's when they often allow a plea to a lesser charge to save court time.

Cop out. Tell him you were passing to get to the right lane and noticed the officer with his lights off.

Usually it means nothing, but gives the DA a chance to collect court costs, and perhaps reduce the speed for your insurance.

If he is playing hard ball it still gives you a chance to ask for postponment to get an attorney.

I don't have a clue about your state but in NC, nine or less doesn't let the insurance company increase the rates.