reckless driving in Hanover County, VA

What is the name of your state? NC
recently was charged with reckless driving (85 in 65) in hanover county; no previous speeding record or charges; am worried as to what i can do when i go to court; cannot afford lawyer. four questions:
1. where can i go to find out my rights (lawyer will charge $950, cannot afford as am in medical school)
2. if i show up in court and speak in my own defense, will this work?
3. how can i attest to my good character in court and fact that radar machines can make errors; will it help or alienate judge?
4. is this civil or criminal court?

would appreciate any words of wisdom.
thanks.

sorry to take up more of your time and am very grateful for this resource and your time.

also wanted to know how/if i could plead for community service/driving school/community service to reduce my charges? am out of state, not sure if this applies for out of state folks.

also, this court doesn't accept prayers for judgement. any other ideas on what to do to reduce level of offense? also don't want to annoy judge b/c frankly, was going above speed limit even if not as high as 85 mph and will not do it again.

thank you very much.

[JETX]

"where can i go to find out my rights (lawyer will charge $950, cannot afford as am in medical school)"
*** Really simple. You have the right to defend yourself against the charges. If you feel that you have a defense, you can either present it yourself (not really recommended) or you can have an attorney.

"if i show up in court and speak in my own defense, will this work?"
*** No one can answer that. We simply don't know what your defense is, or how you can present it, or your facts, or......

"how can i attest to my good character in court and fact that radar machines can make errors; will it help or alienate judge?"
*** That defense has been attempted literally thousands of times..... and doesn't work. If that is your defense, you are DOA (in my opinion).

"is this civil or criminal court?"
*** Criminal.

[HomeGuru]

JETX, good use of DOA since the writer is in med school.
Now respond to more posts, stat.

thanks for your medically precise advice jetx.
anyone have any words of wisdom for going to court to try and overturn a reckless driving charge without lawyer?
any references to look at, precendents, any DOs and any other DON'Ts ?
if only i was a real doctor and had $$ to pay...
no, actually, if only i'd gone to law school instead...

thanks all for your time again, this is a great resource.

[JETX]

Just so I have this right....
1) You WERE speeding (85 in a 65).
2) You got a ticket.
3) No other 'issues'.
4) Yet, you are trying to "overturn a reckless driving charge" that you apparently admit that you were doing (I say this because you haven't disputed the speeding charge in your posts).

I say, "Don't do the crime if you aren't willing to serve the time".
The only real question remaining is.... how much?

Do's:
1) Watch your speed.
2) Wear your seatbelts.
3) Keep your foot out of the carburetor (or throttle body, or injectors, or.... )
4) Learn to accept the consequences of your actions.

Don'ts:
1) Speed
2) Drive reckless
3) Get caught
4) Don't whine and weasel if you do get caught.

thanks for your posting.
not sure if was going at 85 mph or not, makes me sound even stupider when i admit i did not look, just freaked out and slowed down as soon as i saw the officer put on his flashers and follow.
am not disputing that i was speeding, i was and deserve those consequences, am questioning whether it was 85 or in definition of 'reckless driving' versus speeding. since i have no real way to prove what speed i was going at, seems to be a moot point.
think i will talk to some lawyers and post my results so it may help others.

[spawn_x]

85 in 65 does not fall for reckless driving here in CA.. not sure about your state.

as for the radar guns there is a long shot.

request (demand) the caliberation record for that radar gun, and get a tuning fork..

chances are they won't be able to get the records and you can claim that the gun was not caliberated. if the records are present, use the tuning fork to show them that the radar gun is not caliberated (hopefully its off )

in the guy's defense yes he broke the law by speeding, but a reckless driving charge for 85 in 65 is rediculous IMO.

[JETX]

"85 in 65 does not fall for reckless driving here in CA.. not sure about your state."
*** The charge of reckless driving in NC is not directly related to the speed, but the circumstances.
"§ 20-140. Reckless driving.
(a) Any person who drives any vehicle upon a highway or any public vehicular area carelessly and heedlessly in willful
or wanton disregard of the rights or safety of others shall be guilty of reckless driving.
(b) Any person who drives any vehicle upon a highway or any public vehicular area without due caution and circumspection and at a speed or in a manner so as to endanger or be likely to endanger any person or property shall be guilty of reckless driving.
(c) Repealed by Session Laws 1983, c. 435, s. 23.
(d) Reckless driving as defined in subsections (a) and (b) is a Class 2 misdemeanor.
(e) Repealed by Session Laws 1983, c. 435, s. 23.
(f) A person is guilty of the Class 2 misdemeanor of reckless driving if the person drives a commercial motor vehicle carrying a load that is subject to the permit requirements of G.S. 20-119 upon a highway or any public vehicular area either:
(1) Carelessly and heedlessly in willful or wanton disregard of the rights or safety of others; or
(2) Without due caution and circumspection and at a speed or in a manner so as to endanger or be likely to endanger any person or property."

Oh, and the California reckless driving conditions can be found at:
[url]http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=veh&group=38001-39000&file=38316-38318.5[/url]

"as for the radar guns there is a long shot."
*** Yes, an extremely LONG shot. But not based on the following.

"request (demand) the caliberation record for that radar gun, and get a tuning fork..

chances are they won't be able to get the records and you can claim that the gun was not caliberated."
*** They do not need to have any certificate at all. Most modern units have either an internal calibation system or use the old manual tuning fork method. The only requirement for validation is the officers statement that it was done.... and is sometimes noted in the log book... but not always and not required.

"if the records are present, use the tuning fork to show them that the radar gun is not caliberated (hopefully its off )"
*** The accuracy of the gun in the courtroom has no relevance to the accuracy on the date of the ticket.

[spawn_x]

as i said, in CA 85 in 65 is not reckless driving. On a regular day the average speed is 70-75 in a 65 zone. 85 is a 180 dollar ticket.

reckless driving is over 99 or 100.

as for the radar gun statement, it worked for me, however the truth was that i was in fact not speeding the 55 in 35 that the cop wrote me up for.

what also aided my case was that there was no traffic near me so his only proof of my speed was the radar gun, which i proved to be mis-caliberated (the last date it was caliberated was before i got the ticket, and it was off in court so the ticket was dismissed (because as i said, i was not speeding and was proving a rightful cause).

i have also not "asked if its possible" to see the caliberation papers but sort of "demanded" them. nobody objected to that...

i do believe the radar gun method is a worthy one because the speed was determined entirely by the radar gun and you have the right to examine it because there is a possiblity it was malfunctioning...

just my 2 cents.

You citation should state exactly what the careless and reckless act was. Were you also charged with a speeding violation?
Was you charge in Virginia or North Carolina?

[JETX]

"as i said, in CA 85 in 65 is not reckless driving. On a regular day the average speed is 70-75 in a 65 zone. 85 is a 180 dollar ticket. reckless driving is over 99 or 100."
*** Simply, you are wrong. If you would take the time to review the CA Code, you would notice that there is no specific speed (just as in NC). The finding of reckless driving depends on the circumstances, not the speed. For example, if you drove 10 MPH down a busy sidewalk, that would be reckless driving!!

"as for the radar gun statement, it worked for me, however the truth was that i was in fact not speeding the 55 in 35 that the cop wrote me up for."
*** Since there are in fact LOTS of speed detection devices (laser, etc.) the suggestions for radar calibration is very seldom an issue anymore.

"what also aided my case was that there was no traffic near me so his only proof of my speed was the radar gun, which i proved to be mis-caliberated (the last date it was caliberated was before i got the ticket, and it was off in court so the ticket was dismissed (because as i said, i was not speeding and was proving a rightful cause)."
*** Further proof that even judges make mistakes occasionally.

"i have also not "asked if its possible" to see the caliberation papers but sort of "demanded" them. nobody objected to that..."
*** Not relevant. See my earlier post.

"i do believe the radar gun method is a worthy one because the speed was determined entirely by the radar gun and you have the right to examine it because there is a possiblity it was malfunctioning..."
*** Wrong again. The normal layperson isn't qualified to 'examine' a radar unit to determine its accuracy. In fact, your whole scenario before the court sounds suspect.

"just my 2 cents."
*** Did you drop your change??

[spawn_x]

*** Simply, you are wrong. If you would take the time to review the CA Code, you would notice that there is no specific speed (just as in NC). The finding of reckless driving depends on the circumstances, not the speed. For example, if you drove 10 MPH down a busy sidewalk, that would be reckless driving!!

-understood/agreed. i was referring to a normal scenario (no traffic, no rain, no snow, no blocked roads) with few cars on the freeway, in that case simply speeding 85 in 65 would not be reckless driving. he has not mentioned anything else written on the ticket so i assume the only charge was 85 in a 65 zone.

*** Since there are in fact LOTS of speed detection devices (laser, etc.) the suggestions for radar calibration is very seldom an issue anymore.

-"I" was clocked by a radar gun, what do laser, etc. devices have to do with this...?

*** Further proof that even judges make mistakes occasionally.

-that or i did bring a valid point. did you misread the part where i said i was not going 55? 40 the most in a 35 zone with no other traffic.

*** Wrong again. The normal layperson isn't qualified to 'examine' a radar unit to determine its accuracy. In fact, your whole scenario before the court sounds suspect.

-however why wouldn't hehave the right to request the papers confirming caliberation, no?

*** Did you drop your change??

-yes, please send it back to me and i'll appreciate it greatly.