Looking for LIDAR information in WA state

[LegalNewbie123]

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

A few months ago I was pulled over on a city street by a police officer and told I was going 58mph in a 35mph zone while I was passing another car. I'm not certain if I need to certify my innocence here, but I was actually going at 35mph and driving my mother home. She was witness to the speed I was driving at, though from what I've read this isn't much help.
I sent a letter to the prosecuting attorney requesting a great deal of information including witness statements, make, model, serial number of the lidar device, training record of the officer, calibration and repair history for the lidar device, manual for the lidar device, any documentation the officer may rely on, copy of the officers ticket, any disciplinary action taken against the officer, and a complete log of radio transmissions between the officer and dispatch pertaining to the ticket.
What I got was a copy of the ticket, a copy of the officer's affidavit, a driving abstract (which looks like just a copy of my driving record), and several certificates of calibration for the lidar detector (LTI Ultralyte LRB).

In the affidavit the officer states he performed a confidence check in the morning and afternoon (with specific times) using the "Delta Distance Check", and performed a scope alignment test. Neither of these verify that the lidar was able to accurately check speed, right?

The calibration certificates (I received 5) state that the unit had been calibrated with these tests on the 2nd and 4th:
(1) Self test, initialization and display
(2) Scope alignment test
(3) Fixed distance/Zero velocity and delta distance test
(4) Reference Frequency test

and this test on the 5th and 12th:

Doppler program utilizing precision signal generators to simulate speeds at 5mph increments from 20mph to 120mph.

Here they list a 30mph and 55mph tuning fork as well as two antennas (none of which have serial numbers) as being used to perform the test.

The last certificate was just a general certificate of calibration on the 13th.

My ticket was given on the 7th.

So my question for that is, does this mean the lidar was not necessarily properly calibrated on the 7th when I received my ticket?

I can't find anything that indicates how long each calibration is good for in Washington state, but I find it odd that these tests are only a few days apart. Also I've been all over the internet looking for answers to these questions and have only found a few good websites that give any relevant information. One of the other threads had a few posts recommending the TIPMRA website. After looking through some of the information they claim to contain I've been trying to find information about the case law they mention but can't find anything other than what they have on their own website, or at least google and findlaw.com don't seem to be any help.

Should I just pay the thirty dollars and get a membership, or whatever it is, to TIPMRA?
Also, how do I find any case laws specific to my own state?

I know this post is long and I apologize for it, but if anybody is willing to help please let me know. I was absolutely sure the lidar had been improperly calibrated when I was pulled over, but I don't know what the standards are for calibration, and though I can use the lidar defence listed at TIPMRA, without spending some money I probably won't have the supporting case law to back me up.

Thanks in advance.

[poncho]

Not posting for legal help. Are you accused of a criminal traffic infraction or like most tickets in Washington State, you received a civil infraction? The Legislature decriminalized many minor and common traffic offenses, including most speeding violations. It's easier for disposition of offenses. Cheaper for the state, no jury trial, they can limit and make you pay the costs of your witnesses and most important no need to appoint a costly public defender if you cannot afford an attorney!

Not to be mean or anything, just helping you out and if you don't believe. Get a free consult from any traffic attorney advertising in the yellow pages. In Washington state the hearing only needs to determine you went; 1 to 29 mph over the posted sign for a speeding ticket. Hence why you will not find any Washington State case law on LIDAR certification.








[

[LegalNewbie123]

Thanks, I didn't realize this was a criminal violation only forum, and the input on Washington case law is incredibly helpful. But is there any way of finding out if the lidar would be considered properly calibrated from those test dates?

My assumption was that the LIDAR was not calibrated when I was stopped, I didn't even think that the police officer would just lie about how fast I was going. Given that, and that the ticket is $104, should I pay for the TIPMRA package and try to get all the case law they recommend to take in with me, or just try to use the lidar defense listed?

I apologize if this isn't the proper place to put this question, but it looked like the right place.

[poncho]

Not really legal advice. The prosecution does not have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you sped. In my personnel opinion your not going to win challenging the speed measuring device. It's not that this is the wrong place for information either.

The judge will decide whether or not the infraction was committed based on the preponderance of the evidence. The state supreme court in WA has held: speed measuring device certificate as an attachment to the officer's own statement is not necessary. I'll find the case, or you can ask any traffic attorney in WA. Contested hearing, the prosecuting attorney does not have to show up! Just my opinion, don't believe it would work. Again get a free 20 minute consult from any WA attorney in the yellow pages, will tell you its a waste of time and energy to try and argue if calibrated or not when you were stopped.

[LegalNewbie123]

Interesting. I actually have talked to a local attorney, but I didn't get a whole lot of information from him about the calibration certificates or how and when they should be calibrated.

From what you're saying then, unless I can cast doubt on the officer himself, then I'm pretty much not going to win?

Please do find the case, sounds like some interesting reading.

According to the responses so far I'm probably going to be buying into the TIPMRA to see if I can make use of case law presented there.

The website is [url]http://tipmra.com[/url] if anybody is interested in giving me an opinion.

[racer72]

Having attended many traffic court hearing over the past 10 years, it has been extremely rare that a challenge to the speed measuring device has resulted in the dismissal of a ticket. My suggestion, if you have an otherwise clean driving record, would be to ask for a deferral. Get no tickets for a year and this one goes away just like it never happened. Get another though and both hit your driving record at the same time.

[LegalNewbie123]

Will a deferral still cost me money?

I seem to recall having read somewhere that it will, and in any event I wasn't speeding so is there something else I should focus on?

[poncho]

I agree a deferral would be the way to go. But thought you could only request one within the 15 days of receiving the ticket. Of course the deferral will cost money. $100 to 250.


Took awhile.

[url=http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=wa&vol=2001_sc/69881-3&invol=3]FindLaw | Cases and Codes[/url]

The above is the only cases I could find that dealt with SMD certificates as evidence. One of the only defense's you could pull off is the posted limit being higher. Sometimes police make mistake's and its posted higher.

[LegalNewbie123]

poncho: thanks for the link, made for an interesting read. However, the decision only applies to whether or not a certificate is admissible by the judge himself, versus having a prosecutor admit it. I tend not to agree with the decision made, but this has very little to do with whether or not the admitted certificates actually show proper or timely calibration, and I wasn't planning to work that angle anyway.

I'm still fairly certain it should be possible to show improper calibration from those dates given, but I have no idea where to look for what standards for calibration of lidar or even radar exist.

But anyway, has anybody checked out [url=]http://tipmra.com[/url] ? Does it seem like a reputable business? Should I invest my 30 quid to see what they have? The lidar defense they present seems fairly thorough.

[poncho]

Originally Posted by LegalNewbie123

poncho: thanks for the link, made for an interesting read. However, the decision only applies to whether or not a certificate is admissible by the judge himself, versus having a prosecutor admit it. I tend not to agree with the decision made, but this has very little to do with whether or not the admitted certificates actually show proper or timely calibration, and I wasn't planning to work that angle anyway.

I'm still fairly certain it should be possible to show improper calibration from those dates given, but I have no idea where to look for what standards for calibration of lidar or even radar exist.

But anyway, has anybody checked out [url=http://tipmra.com]Beat that Evil Speeding Ticket[/url] ? Does it seem like a reputable business? Should I invest my 30 quid to see what they have? The lidar defense they present seems fairly thorough.

In my personnel opinion. Investing 30 quid is a waste of British Pound Sterling and roughly $60 bucks U.S green backs or even if only $30 American. For WA the information is not worth 30 peso's of Cuban currency, heck Mexican for that matter. My case cite example link is a state Supreme Court case decided in 2001. Note the dissenting opinion made issue that the "judge" was also the "prosecutor". Think the dissenter forgot the state legislature decriminalized traffic infractions nearly 30 years ago! The other Justices however did not the state can enter or not any Prima facie evidence they want.

Your link wrote:

The prosecution presented no documentation that the unit was certified as being accurate, no manufactures certification of accuracy or recent shop visit for function and accuracy testing

WA only needs to prove by the preponderance of the evidence that you went between 1 to 29 mph over the posted speed. To make you guilty. You could try objecting on the quoted grounds but the Judge I believe could easily over rule you! Considering who the prosecution is in most hearings.

Another quote from your link:

Court Tested and Trial Proven

Not in WA state because its not a court and trial. Its a hearing! Hence why judges can practice law despite the state Constitution making that not allowed by a sitting judge.

It's your money, so spend it any way you like! Personnel opinion a free consult is a better deal.