Left Turn Accident: How to Avoid PA Points

[MASTERNC]

What is the name of your state? Pennslyvania

I think someone posted a situation like this (in another state though). I was making a left turn at a 4-way intersection controlled by a stop light with no turn arrows. There was a car in the oncoming direction also turning left and I knew we could both proceed with no problem. I saw nobody behind that vehicle and assumed I was clear to turn. Well out of nowhere I get hit by an SUV who was going straight.

Based on testimony at the accident scene (each party saying what they were doing when the accident happened), I received a ticket for failing to yield when turning. If I am convicted, I will have 3 points added to my license, which will cause my insurance to skyrocket on top of the accident (which I am "at fault" according to state law) which totaled my car.

I am a very careful driver and have never had a ticket or accident before. I would have never made that turn if I could have seen that car (it is possible that the other driver tailgated the other vehicle or went around it illegally as he hit me hard and went another 100 or more feet before stopping--it is unlikely that he saw me either). Unfortunately, points are mandatory upon conviction and there is no such thing as driving school in PA.

My question is if I explain my side of the story to the judge is there any chance that I could be acquitted or be found guilty of a non-moving violation? The cop who wrote the ticket did not witness the accident firsthand and the only evidence is the accident itself.

 

[seniorjudge]

What is the name of your state? Pennslyvania

I think someone posted a situation like this (in another state though). I was making a left turn at a 4-way intersection controlled by a stop light with no turn arrows. There was a car in the oncoming direction also turning left and I knew we could both proceed with no problem. I saw nobody behind that vehicle and assumed I was clear to turn. Well out of nowhere I get hit by an SUV who was going straight.

Based on testimony at the accident scene (each party saying what they were doing when the accident happened), I received a ticket for failing to yield when turning. If I am convicted, I will have 3 points added to my license, which will cause my insurance to skyrocket on top of the accident (which I am "at fault" according to state law) which totaled my car.

I am a very careful driver and have never had a ticket or accident before. I would have never made that turn if I could have seen that car (it is possible that the other driver tailgated the other vehicle or went around it illegally as he hit me hard and went another 100 or more feet before stopping--it is unlikely that he saw me either). Unfortunately, points are mandatory upon conviction and there is no such thing as driving school in PA.

My question is if I explain my side of the story to the judge is there any chance that I could be acquitted or be found guilty of a non-moving violation? The cop who wrote the ticket did not witness the accident firsthand and the only evidence is the accident itself.

Q: My question is if I explain my side of the story to the judge is there any chance that I could be acquitted or be found guilty of a non-moving violation?

A: No; talk to the prosecutor and see if you can work a deal. The only way the judge wants to hear your story is if you plead not guilty and have a trial.


Q: The cop who wrote the ticket did not witness the accident firsthand and the only evidence is the accident itself.

A: Circumstantial evidence is the best you can get. Just ask Scott Peterson.

 

[MASTERNC]

I apologize for not saying it before. I have already plead not guilty and have a court date with the local district judge. The only prosecutor, however, is the police officer.

 

[weenor]

You are required by law to yield in your position, with your wheels pointed forward until you have made sure that there is no on coming traffic. You did not do this. Not seeing the car is irrelevant. As SJ indicated try to plead with the prosecutor assigned to your case. The prosecutor is an attorney assigned to the district court. If there isn't one, talk to the judge for a deal before being sworn in.

 

[MASTERNC]

Cards Stacked Against Me

This is an update to the post I made in late May regarding a left-turn citation and accident.

I showed up for my trial today and was shocked when the other driver came in to testify (I was not notified of this but guess that I didn't have to be). As I mentioned before, the other driver was a mechanic at a garage that often provides towing services for the township. The police officer immediately greeted him by first name and took him back privately for 5 minutes before the trial began.

In the trial, the other driver testified that he saw three drivers preparing to make left turns in front of him (he did not say if they were in his direction or in the oncoming direction) and even said he slowed down (even though he hit my car at twice the speed I was going). I then presented my defense showing how the damage was inconsistent with the type of crash I was involved in and that all I saw in the oncoming direction was a white vehicle that was also turning left at the intersection.

The cop then redirected his witness and asked if there were any vehicles in front of him turning and he then said no (even though his previous testimony seemed to suggest otherwise).

Unfortunately I was convicted of the violation even though it seems like the cop was playing favorites by taking any blame off the mechanic and placing it on me. My parents and I still think he went around the white car or was hidden behind the white car and then floored it through the intersection without looking.

I can appeal the citation; however, I don't know if the fees for hiring a lawyer are worth it. The only thing that would make an appeal worthwhile is if my family's insurance will increase more than what it would cost for an attorney.

From experience, how much can I expect my insurance to increase (I have had no other accidents or moving violations ever)? Also if the ticket resulted from the accident, are they usually treated separately or as one event? I know every company is different but I just want a general idea.

As for cars, I do not own a high-performance vehicle. All of my family's vehicles are conservative (Camry V6, Accord, Odyssey van).

 

[sukharev]

Police officer is not a prosecutor, and you could have objected to the whole trial and motioned for dismissal if DA is not present. You have ignored good advice people gave you, and did not talk to prosecutor before trial. Why do you expect any good advice now?

 

[MASTERNC]

Police officer is not a prosecutor, and you could have objected to the whole trial and motioned for dismissal if DA is not present. You have ignored good advice people gave you, and did not talk to prosecutor before trial. Why do you expect any good advice now?

In PA, the citing officer acts as the Commonwealth's prosecutor. The trial is done at a district justice's office. The police officer would not have negotiated with me because it appeared that he wanted to keep his friend out of trouble. I'm sure he would have lost his job if he had been found at fault. The cop, as I said before, redirected the mechanic after my testimony and even had a copy of the PA Vehicle Code and read out of it word for word. He then took what I had said about no other vehicles being visible and said I did not yield because I did not see them.

I think his bringing of the other driver to the trial says a lot about the intent to convict. Normally I wouldn't imagine that many summary trials have prosecution witnesses other than the police officer.

The only way I can talk to an actual prosecutor is if I appeal this to Common Pleas Court, which costs more money and requires an attorney.

 

[sukharev]

Apparently you misunderstood the notion of "negotiate". It's not the time to find another guilty party. It's the time when you hear: "rather than going to trial, we can offer you...(a lesser charge)". It's called plea bargain.

I still think officer is not a prosecutor (as he does not have enough judicial background), and you could simply object to that fact. Also, there is clear conflict of interest. That said, what is likely the case is that this is a "magistrate hearing", that is not a real court. Therefore, rules are different from real trial and officer can indeed act like a prosecutor. You should have still objected, since at this point you had nothing to loose. Too late, anyhow.

 

[moburkes]

What is the name of your state? Pennslyvania

I think someone posted a situation like this (in another state though). I was making a left turn at a 4-way intersection controlled by a stop light with no turn arrows. There was a car in the oncoming direction also turning left and I knew we could both proceed with no problem. I saw nobody behind that vehicle and assumed I was clear to turn. Well out of nowhere I get hit by an SUV who was going straight.

Based on testimony at the accident scene (each party saying what they were doing when the accident happened), I received a ticket for failing to yield when turning. If I am convicted, I will have 3 points added to my license, which will cause my insurance to skyrocket on top of the accident (which I am "at fault" according to state law) which totaled my car.

I am a very careful driver and have never had a ticket or accident before. I would have never made that turn if I could have seen that car (it is possible that the other driver tailgated the other vehicle or went around it illegally as he hit me hard and went another 100 or more feet before stopping--it is unlikely that he saw me either). Unfortunately, points are mandatory upon conviction and there is no such thing as driving school in PA.

My question is if I explain my side of the story to the judge is there any chance that I could be acquitted or be found guilty of a non-moving violation? The cop who wrote the ticket did not witness the accident firsthand and the only evidence is the accident itself.

I do see that you posted the results of the trial. But, don't worry about the ticket and your insurance. When there are 2 violations on the same day (your ticket, and the at fault accident), most insurance companies will only charge the higher point incident (in your case, the accident). Therefore, even though you were eventually found guilty, this should not affect the insurance premiums at all.

 

[MASTERNC]

I do see that you posted the results of the trial. But, don't worry about the ticket and your insurance. When there are 2 violations on the same day (your ticket, and the at fault accident), most insurance companies will only charge the higher point incident (in your case, the accident). Therefore, even though you were eventually found guilty, this should not affect the insurance premiums at all.

Thanks for the information. I feel a little better. I guess I just have to watch my back for next couple of years (like I always have) to make sure nothing else happens.

 

[MASTERNC]

Apparently you misunderstood the notion of "negotiate". It's not the time to find another guilty party. It's the time when you hear: "rather than going to trial, we can offer you...(a lesser charge)". It's called plea bargain.

I still think officer is not a prosecutor (as he does not have enough judicial background), and you could simply object to that fact. Also, there is clear conflict of interest. That said, what is likely the case is that this is a "magistrate hearing", that is not a real court. Therefore, rules are different from real trial and officer can indeed act like a prosecutor. You should have still objected, since at this point you had nothing to loose. Too late, anyhow.

I agree with you 100% that the officer should not be the prosecutor. However, he is the only person (other than the magistrate) with whom you can negotiate and I wasn't about to start pointing fingers, which I fear would have made everyone upset. Objecting wouldn't have done anything either since all traffic tickets are tried initially at district justices; if you object, your only option is to appeal, which like I said, costs a lot of money and isn't worth it in this case. I don't think the officer wanted me to get away with this no matter what I tried.

I would love to file a complaint of suspected "unethical" behavior but that would be shooting myself in the foot I fear.

 

[Zigner]

I agree with you 100% that the officer should not be the prosecutor. However, he is the only person (other than the magistrate) with whom you can negotiate and I wasn't about to start pointing fingers, which I fear would have made everyone upset. Objecting wouldn't have done anything either since all traffic tickets are tried initially at district justices; if you object, your only option is to appeal, which like I said, costs a lot of money and isn't worth it in this case. I don't think the officer wanted me to get away with this no matter what I tried.

I would love to file a complaint of suspected "unethical" behavior but that would be shooting myself in the foot I fear.

You're off base here. You did not yield to oncoming traffic. You were cited for failure to yield to oncoming traffic. Where is there any ethical violation on the part of the officer???

 

[MASTERNC]

You're off base here. You did not yield to oncoming traffic. You were cited for failure to yield to oncoming traffic. Where is there any ethical violation on the part of the officer???

Yes you are right that I was making a left turn. What was completely unnecessary was bringing in the other crash victim for a traffic hearing--the officer and the other gentleman know each other because his garage does towing for the town. I was not informed of the witness. Furthermore, he was taken back privately by the officer prior to the hearing (I know witnesses are normally "prepped" but this was not a DA, this was his "friend" the police officer). Finally, he said that there were 3 vehicles in front of him turning but when I later mentioned the only car I saw in his direction was a white vehicle and not his, the cop re-directed the mechanic and he said that there were no vehicles in front of him.

The mechanic was driving a customer's SUV (it did not sound as if he were road-testing it but was rather running an errand in it) and if he were blamed for any of the crash (whether or not he did anything wrong I did not see but given the damage to both vehicles it is possible) he might be fired.

 

[Zigner]

ALL of which is irrelevant. You were in the wrong. You made the illegal left turn. I'm really confused as to why this seems to be such a difficult thing to understand.