Failed to Drive in Designated Lane

[DocHarley]

What is the name of your state? Colorado

In late August, I was riding my motorcycle on a deserted country road (Sweet Road) to the Air Force Academy to pickup medication. Approximately 5 miles from home I had a one vehicle accident. I broke 5 ribs, suffered a dislocated shoulder, skier's thumb, and a stage-3 concussion.

I have a 1-second video clip in my head of the accident. That clip has me fighting for control of the bike with both hands and the front end wobbling (likely loose head bearings but the insurance company didn't want to have it checked out). There is a skid mark that starts just inside my lane next to the yellow center line and moves to the outside of my lane before going off into a ditch (about 30-40').

While I was in the hospital, the officer came and cited me for "failed to drive in designated lane (42-4-1007(1)(c)". There were no witnesses to the accident and no other vehicles on the road. A driver who later came passing by saw my hi-viz yellow Aerostitch Darien jacket and stopped. He called 911 and my wife.

I went to court yesterday and refused to plea bargain this down - I want to see the evidence. I'm assuming the officer took pictures and is using the skid mark to validate the offense. My argument is they don't know what happened (neither do I). An animal could have darted into my path and, after seeing no traffic coming (I would have known this well before the accident) swerved into the other lane to avoid hitting the animal. On the other hand, looking at the skid mark that starts in my lane, the bike might never have left my lane. Since there's only one skid mark, only one tire was locked. Since my hands were busy trying to bring the bike under control it's not likely that the front brakes were used, only the rear. Thus, the bike could have ridden on the inside of my lane (2-lane country road, 55 speed limit), swerved back to the right then left with the skid beginning just after the first swerve. These are two possibilities.

My question is this - without witnesses, no traffic, and the possibility that the action I took (if I went into the other, vacant, lane) could have been an evasive maneuver does this citation make sense? And if so, how should I proceed?
Thanks,

Nick.
Elbert, Colorado

[The Occultist]

Their evidence will indeed be based on whatever marks are in the road. You will likely not be able to fight this yourself, so you should get an attorney, especially one that may have knowledge in this area.

[efflandt]

It sounds like you do not even know what happened. Ending up in the ditch could be considered failure to drive in designated lane. Did you have a chance to check out your bike yourself to see if there is anything wrong with it?

[DocHarley]

Originally Posted by efflandt

It sounds like you do not even know what happened. Ending up in the ditch could be considered failure to drive in designated lane. Did you have a chance to check out your bike yourself to see if there is anything wrong with it?

Correct, I don't know what put the bike in play; however, I have my suspicions. I suspect the ultimate cause was loose head bearings. In July, the bike had several issues resulting in me taking the bike to the local Harley dealership for service. My comments to them was whatever it takes; however, their most comprehensive service is 20k. The bike had 90k. At 50k (according to the service manual), the bearings are to be replaced but at 20k they're only lubbed. The service manager knew the mileage but the tech who did the service probably didn't so the bearings weren't replaced. I tried to get the insurance company to have the bike checked so they could, if the cause was loose head bearings, recover their costs to me and for my medical. To my knowledge this didn't occur.

I live in a very rural area. One possibility (that I do not know occurred) is that a small animal darted in front of the bike. Like most people, I would have taken evasive action. If the head bearings were loose (the indication of this is from my 1-second video remembrance of the handlebars shaking and hard to control), the sudden and sharp turn could have caused the bearings to become loose to the point that the bike became uncontrollable. On the other hand, it's also possible that there was no animal and the bearings just became too loose to control.

The tires were new (within 30-60 days for front/rear respectively). Gravel or sand would not have resulted in the lose of control experienced or supported by the skid mark. I've ridden 36 years just over 700,000 miles on 3 continents - I know bikes, physics, and the dynamics of various conditions and how bikes respond to those conditions.

Could there be some other cause that I haven't thought of? Yes. On the other hand, if an animal (would have to be small otherwise I would have seen it well beforehand and taken appropriate action, e.g. slowed down) did dart in front of me then taking evasive action on an empty road is what most people would do unless they felt that such action would be of greater danger to themselves than hitting the animal. I doubt few people would have sufficient time to make that decision. Thus, the evasive action itself would consititute a violation although I doubt any police office would ticket if they saw such an action.

Again, you're correct - I don't know what actually put the bike in play and I suspect I never will. The short snapshot I have is vivid but, according to the skid mark, appears it was just before going down. I actually remember almost bringing the bike under control. This thought is supported by the straightened skid along the outside of the lane. The skid lasted about 20' and then the bike left the road. Here is a link to the skid marks. The arrow at the top is where I went off the road. [url]http://www.docharley.com/photo_accident_082707.htm[/url]

As an aside, I truly wish I could remember what happened. A stage-3 concussion is any concussion resulting in loss of consciousness. In most cases short term memory is also affected.

Nick.

[Zigner]

You won't have much of a case against the dealer. The service was performed in July. Whatever service was performed would have been listed on your repair order. Your extensive knowledge of the requirements may well work against you, as you accepted the work order as complete.

[DocHarley]

Originally Posted by Zigner

You won't have much of a case against the dealer. The service was performed in July. Whatever service was performed would have been listed on your repair order. Your extensive knowledge of the requirements may well work against you, as you accepted the work order as complete.

Yes. I have no intention of going after the dealer. What is done is done.

[You Are Guilty]

Originally Posted by 42-4-1007

Driving on roadways laned for traffic.
(1) Whenever any roadway has been divided into two or more clearly marked lanes for traffic, the following rules in addition to all others consistent with this section shall apply:

(a) A vehicle shall be driven as nearly as practicable entirely within a single lane and shall not be moved from such lane until the driver has first ascertained that such movement can be made with safety.

(b) Upon a roadway which is divided into three lanes and provides for two-way movement of traffic, a vehicle shall not be driven in the center lane except when overtaking and passing another vehicle traveling in the same direction where the roadway is clearly visible and such center lane is clear of traffic within a safe distance, or in preparation for a left turn, or where such center lane is at the time allocated exclusively to the traffic moving in the direction the vehicle is proceeding and is designated by official traffic control devices to give notice of such allocation. Under no condition shall an attempt be made to pass upon the shoulder or any portion of the roadway remaining to the right of the indicated right-hand traffic lane.

(c) Official traffic control devices may be erected directing specified traffic to use a designated lane or designating those lanes to be used by traffic moving in a particular direction regardless of the center of the roadway, and drivers of vehicles shall obey the directions of every such device.

Perhaps I'm missing something, but what traffic control devices were present at the time of the accident that the ticket is referring to in subsection (c)?

[FlyingRon]

I'm confused over what they think you did.

The (c) clause of that statue pretty much covers driving in the wrong lane as indicated by a sign or signal:

First off. Does Sweet road have a center line painted on it? If not then NONE of 1007 applies.

(b) wouldn't apply unless there is a center lane.

You could make a stretch that if you departed the road you might have violated (a), although, I'd argue that the law is talking about crossing into the other lanes NOT departing from the road (did you cross the centerline)? Further, this implies an active attempt to leave the lane (e.g., you swung out into the opposite lane to pass something) rather than you conincentally landing in skidding accross it in the crash sequence.
----
42-4-1007. Driving on roadways laned for traffic.
Statute text

(1) Whenever any roadway has been divided into two or more clearly marked lanes for traffic, the following rules in addition to all others consistent with this section shall apply:

(a) A vehicle shall be driven as nearly as practicable entirely within a single lane and shall not be moved from such lane until the driver has first ascertained that such movement can be made with safety.

(b) Upon a roadway which is divided into three lanes and provides for two-way movement of traffic, a vehicle shall not be driven in the center lane except when overtaking and passing another vehicle traveling in the same direction where the roadway is clearly visible and such center lane is clear of traffic within a safe distance, or in preparation for a left turn, or where such center lane is at the time allocated exclusively to the traffic moving in the direction the vehicle is proceeding and is designated by official traffic control devices to give notice of such allocation. Under no condition shall an attempt be made to pass upon the shoulder or any portion of the roadway remaining to the right of the indicated right-hand traffic lane.

(c) Official traffic control devices may be erected directing specified traffic to use a designated lane or designating those lanes to be used by traffic moving in a particular direction regardless of the center of the roadway, and drivers of vehicles shall obey the directions of every such device.

(d) Official traffic control devices may be installed prohibiting the changing of lanes on sections of roadway, and drivers of vehicles shall obey the directions of every such device.

(2) Any person who violates any provision of this section commits a class A traffic infraction.

[FlyingRon]

Looking at Google it appears Sweet Road is a flat, fairly straight, two lane (with a dotted line) road? Correct?

[You Are Guilty]

Originally Posted by FlyingRon

Looking at Google it appears Sweet Road is a flat, fairly straight, two lane (with a dotted line) road? Correct?

Beat you by a minute and check his photo - its a 2 lane road with a slight s-curve.

[DocHarley]

Originally Posted by You Are Guilty

Perhaps I'm missing something, but what traffic control devices were present at the time of the accident that the ticket is referring to in subsection (c)?

None. It's just a regular two-land country road with solid lines and a slight s-curve. Here's the link to pictures of the road: [url]http://www.docharley.com/photo_accident_082707.htm[/url]

[You Are Guilty]

Here's the "catch".

From my perspective, they wrote you up under the wrong statute number. If that's true, then the ticket, as currently written, should be dismissed. However, the state has up to one year (double check - I'm going off memory) to file misdemeanor charges, which means if/when this ticket is dismissed, they can write you a new, correct ticket which actually covers skidding into a ditch.

So while you may get out of one ticket, you might get hit with another that's not as easy to dodge, and which might cost you substantially more (in terms of fighting and/or fines).

[DocHarley]

Originally Posted by You Are Guilty

Here's the "catch".

From my perspective, they wrote you up under the wrong statute number. If that's true, then the ticket, as currently written, should be dismissed. However, the state has up to one year (double check - I'm going off memory) to file misdemeanor charges, which means if/when this ticket is dismissed, they can write you a new, correct ticket which actually covers skidding into a ditch.

So while you may get out of one ticket, you might get hit with another that's not as easy to dodge, and which might cost you substantially more (in terms of fighting and/or fines).

Hmmm, that's interesting. I've never heard of an offense for skidding into a ditch but then again, I'm neither in law enforcement or a lawyer. That will be something to consider.

[FlyingRon]

Originally Posted by You Are Guilty

Here's the "catch".

From my perspective, they wrote you up under the wrong statute number. If that's true, then the ticket, as currently written, should be dismissed. However, the state has up to one year (double check - I'm going off memory) to file misdemeanor charges, which means if/when this ticket is dismissed, they can write you a new, correct ticket which actually covers skidding into a ditch.

What statute would that be?

Frankly I'd get the police report and my picture and take my chances in court on this one.
But Doc should probably run it by a lawyer familiar with this court.

[You Are Guilty]

Unfortunately, its 7pm on a Friday and I'm facing a midnight filing deadline, so you'll have to comb the CO statutes yourself if you need to find other potential charges. Off the top of my head, look for things like "reckless driving", "exhibition of speed" or "failure to control vehicle" - they're pretty common in most states.

Heck, I've even heard of people being charged with destruction of public property for crashes (although here, some ditch dirt would be a stretch).