Kentucky Traffic Tickets

[Dobromir]

Hello!

I got a question concerning evidence regarding calibration of the radar device and tuning forks. I just finished my trial following one of the ticket fighting guides, which was very comprehensive and blah blah blah....

Was found guilty of speeding but manage to quote "speed survey" without objection from the prosecutor ,which was supposedly the basis of, as the judge said:" the benefit of a doubt", to strike the 45mph speed limit zone and use 55mph. Essentially speed reduction ( possibly a common occurrence in traffic courts). However I wasn't just following a book script I spend about a month educating myself on the subject. According to my knowledge the whole proceeding was close to what I expected it to be. Unfortunately I was not as articulate as I wanted to be.( first time in court here etc. basically virgin jitters). It seems that everything went fine, until I asked for actual arrest/activity log and tuning fork calibration certificate.

During cross examination officer stated that: he done the internal check and tuning fork calibration in the morning and after the arrest. When I asked for the documentation I was told ( after the funny looks from DA to cop to judge) that there is not any. I stated that higher courts clearly determined that, that officer's testimony to the calibration procedure and radar being accurate can only be taken at face value if it is uncontested. ( Commonwealth vs Honeycutt, and state vs Tomanelli which was one of the cases appellate court based their decision in Honeycutt case). A disclaimer :I did not introduce actual paperwork for judge's consideration despite having the copies...

I stated again that I need those from the DA to prove the actual calibration taken place and was told again that there is not any logs of arrest or activity and calibration certificates for the radar or tuning forks. i motioned for dismissal on the grounds of an insufficient evidence and was promptly found guilty with speed zone exception. I see plenty of holes in what I did and how I did it so that is not an issue.
My question is this: assuming that I formally introduced the case law, can the judge and prosecutor with officer's testimony just tell me , that none of that exist ? And what my course of action should be if my local police department doesn't actually have/use those ?

One more thing. During the cross the prosecutor mention that I never subpoena anything, I said to the judge that it is foundation part of the evidence ( since it supposedly was accurate speed reading device checked and calibrated) and I didn't need to subpoena those. Judge said its a really a mute point since there aren't any logs and certificates.

Clearly, from my readings and first hand experiences traffic cases are not that complicated, but perhaps a more concise check-list could be made to be followed during those. I think I am gonna start the thread.What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?

 

[I_Got_Banned]

Instead of having us search for those case and reading each in its entirety, how about you post the citations that you think are relevant from those case.

Also, since we do not see many Kentucky cases round these parts, you might want to offer us the statutory authority that states that the officer must have logs for his daily accuracy checks.

 

[Dobromir]

I think, this part is relevant
"Second, the courts will not take judicial notice of the accuracy of the particular instrument employed on a specific occasion, but will treat, as sufficient evidence of accuracy, uncontested testimony that the instrument was tested within a few hours of its specific use, and found to be accurate, by use of a calibrated tuning fork and by a comparison with the speedometer of another vehicle driven through the radar field. 7 Am.Jur.2d, Automobiles and Highway Traffic, sec. 327, pp. 870, 871; State v. Dantonio, 18 N.J. 570, 115 A.2d 35; State v. Graham, Mo.App., 322 S.W.2d 188; State v. Tomanelli, 153 Conn. 365, 216 A.2d 625. In fact, in the latter (Connecticut) case it is indicated that the tuning fork test alone may be sufficient. It is pointed out in that case that the accuracy of the tuning fork itself may be assumed in the absence of an attack by the defendant."

It is from Commonwealth vs Honecutt.. another part of this ruling is very popular weapon prosecutors, all aroud the nation, employ to defeat any attack on officer's traning with the radar.

This is from State vs Tomanelli quoted in Honecut.:

The operator relied, for his assurance of the accuracy of the instrument he was using, on tuningfork tests made before and after the defendant's speed was recorded. These tests, in brief, were made by activating what were described as forty-, sixty- and eighty-mile-per-hour tuning forks and by observing, in each test, that the speedmeter and graphic recorder of the radar instrument indicated corresponding readings of forty, sixty and eighty miles per hour. The theory of the test is that each tuning fork is set to emit a wave frequency corresponding to a mile-per-hour speed equivalent. It is obvious that the tuning forks themselves must be shown to be accurate if they are to be accepted as a valid test of the accuracy of the radar instrument.

Kentucky doesn't have Vehicle code . They have KRS and KAR and I couldn't find nothing in those statues pertinent to arrest logs and radar logs etc.
I am assuming that there is something present in police traffic enforcement procedures and such but I wasn't able to locate those as of yet.

 

[Dobromir]

Therefore my thinking is along this line.
If there is a requirement to prove the accuracy of the radar and tuning forks ( at least in Kentucky) and Kentucky Revised Statues have no mention of arrest log or calibration logs etc. how am I to proceed with obtaining the proof of accuracy of the radar.