• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Fighting a seat belt ticket

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

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

Florida requires drivers to wear a seat belt, but it's not a primary offense - you can't get stopped for a seat-belt violation alone, unless you're under 18 or have a child in the car. I'm bad about wearing mine, I freely admit this. But because I'm normally a very cautious driver, I have never gotten a ticket for not buckling up. (I'm not here to argue the merits of mandatory seat-belt laws, but you can if you want to.)

Tonight I encountered a first. The local police department was conducting what they referred to as a "DUI checkpoint."

They demanded my license, registration and insurance papers - all of which I had, of course - and then they told me they were writing me for a seat-belt violation. (With court costs, statutory additions and local surcharges, this ticket came to $91.)

Here's the thing, though: They made absolutely no effort to determine whether or not I was sober. I had in fact had brandy with dessert; I was perfectly sober but almost certainly had alcohol on my breath. He didn't smell my breath. He didn't ask me if I had been drinking. He definitely didn't perform any field-sobriety tests on me, nor on anyone else that I saw while I was waiting for him to produce the ticket.

Plus, I looked at the Florida statute governing seat-belt infractions.* I don't even see an exception to that law for "DUI checkpoints."

So 1) I don't think it was a valid "DUI checkpoint," and 2) even if it was, I don't see that they can make it a primary offense!

I could easily afford to pay the ticket, but the whole thing has me hacked off. This city was literally raking in thousands of dollars an hour popping people for minor infractions - I'm pretty sure every police car in town was parked there, and they were all using their ticket books. I'm very tempted to fight it.

What say you? Do you think I could I win? Thanks in advance for any advice; you guys don't always tell me what I want to hear but you have never steered me wrong.


* It's 316.614; every link I put to the statute makes my post unacceptably wide but you can view statutes by visiting flsenate.gov and using the "statutes and constitution" link.

If you don't want to plow through the statute, here's a summary of the current state of the law from an analysis of a bill that would have made seat belt violations primary offenses, had it passed, which it did not:

Current law requires a motor vehicle operator, front seat passengers, and all passengers and operators less than 18 years of age to wear safety belts. The “Florida Safety Belt Law” is enforced as a secondary offense for operators and passengers 18 and older; that is, law enforcement officers cannot stop motorists 18 and older solely for not using safety belts. Instead, an officer must first stop a motorist who is 18 or older for a suspected
violation of state traffic, motor vehicle, or driver license laws before issuing a uniform traffic citation for failure to wear a safety belt. It is a primary offense to operate a motor vehicle in this state unless each passenger and the operator of the vehicle under the age of 18 are restrained by a safety belt or by a child restraint device.
 
Last edited:


Hey There

Member
Just the Facts

msincognito,

The summary of the law you posted is clear that the driver needs to be stopped for some other violation to be cited for not wearing a seat belt.
I Googled 316.614 and it clearly states (8) Any person who violates the provisions of this section commits a nonmoving violation, punishable as provided in chapter 318. However, except for violations of s. 316.613 and paragraph (4)(a), enforcement of this section by state or local law enforcement agencies MUST be accomplished only as a secondary action when a driver of a motor vehicle has been detained for a suspected violation of another section of this chapter, chapter 320, or chapter 322.
______________________________________________________
I could easily afford to pay the ticket, but the whole thing has me hacked off. This city was literally raking in thousands of dollars an hour popping people for minor infractions - I'm pretty sure every police car in town was parked there, and they were all using their ticket books. I'm very tempted to fight it.
_________________________________________________________
Why would you not? :confused:

Let us know how this goes.

Best regards,
Hey There
 
Why would you not? :confused:

Let us know how this goes.

Best regards,
Hey There
Thank you.

I followed up on those other statutes and I see nothing about allowing seat-belt tickets to be handed out as primary tickets at DUI checkpoints.

I understand the USC has held DUI checkpoints constitutional, even though they present a strong potential for abuse, because they uphold public safety by keeping drunk drivers off the road.

But that hardly applies if they're not trying to determine whether the drivers are actually drunk!!! I keep going back to the fact that he never even asked me if I had been drinking.

I have been Googling as well - apparently, there's a significant and growing trend of these "DUI checkpoints" in Florida that produce suspiciously few actual DUI arrests. They're basically revenue generators for local government.

Zigner, thanks for the advice.
 

Tallrat

Member
They're basically revenue generators for local government.
Most dui check points don't generate much revenue at all. Our last one used 8 officers for 6 hours and they had maybe 5 seatbelt citations and 2 cracked windshields and 1 tinted window and 1 with no drivers license. On regular patrol one officer who is a real go getter can easily write 2x that in a shift. Buckle Up!
 

Antigone*

Senior Member
Msingocnito,

Take the ticket - really be happy that it was given to you and let it serve as a reminder that your seat belt is very important. It is a very inexpensive but very important lesson to learn.

My 17-year old daughter wasn't wearing her seat belt two months ago. She has severe brain trauma and is not expected to recover. The seat belt would have saved her life.

You are a gift to your loved ones - treat yourself as one.

take care, ana
 

occharge

Member
Misincognito,

I agree with you that to have been cited strictly for a seat belt violation should not have happened. And I personally would be determined to fight it as well. Chances are, you might be able to get it dismissed. Just keep in mind that regardless of how fair & just our legal system is, when all is said & done, the scales of justice will always tip in favor of the officer's word over yours.

Well, your argument is that the officer did not attempt to investigate any "primary violation" therefore a seatbelt violation, which should only be written as a secondary violation should not have been issued.

Consider this (hopefully, someone in law enforcement will confirm this): When an officer ask you if you had been drinking, whether it is at a DUI checkpoint or not, he is not really listening to what you say in response but how you say it, whether you get nervous or not and if you slur your speech, or maybe hesitate... Whether you exhibited any unusual sensitivity to that Giga-candle flashlight he toasted your face with; how your eyes/pupils reacted to light... etc.

In fact, officers will ask us many questions but almost never believe our answers... So really, its not what you say; they never believe you anyway...

Example: {This NEVER happens}
Officer: "Do you know how fast you were going?"
Driver: "Yes sir, I was driving 65mph in 65".
Officer: "Oops, my bad... My Radar gun must've picked u a signal off of another car. Sorry to bother you".

My guess is that the officer will testify that he did in fact investigate a "primary violation"; that being a DUI, regardless of how brief or inconspiuous it may have been.

And the fact that he did not ask you if you had been drinking should have no bearing on his ability to determine whether you're sober or not (not necessarilly that you had been drinking).

He did not ask you if you had been drinking, but he did not approach your window, and immediately ask you for your papers; he had to have asked you something else, or somehow attempted to engaged you in some sort of conversation so as to determine -in his (so called) expert opinion- whether you were DUIing or not.

Also consider that in the time that you slowed down, and as you approached the officer at the actual checkpoint, another officer may have been to the side checking to see if your registration tabs are current, or checking your vehicle for equipment violations such as lights, lenses, tint... etc... (In California, they're supposed to be able to check if your Insurance is still valid) All of which are primary violations.

So he had satisfactorily investigated a primary violation, which therefore allowed him to move forward by citing you for the non-primary violation of not wearing your seat belt.

Lastly, I don't think that "non-primary" really means that it cannot be the "only" violation that appears on a citation!
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top