Right turnn only

[G8RJ]

What is the name of your state? Florida

This is the scenario: A high school parking lot in Central Florida which exits onto a street that runs in front of the high school. There are two lanes exiting the parking lot but the left lane is blocked by a gate that is closed when school lets out so for all intents and purposes there is a single lane exiting the parking lot. At the end of the gate that blocks the left lane is a traffic control device that says "NO LEFT TURNS". On the right side of the parking lot exit is a STOP sign under which is mounted a secondary sign that says “RIGHT TURN ONLY” and a third sign that gives hours of enforcement. On the opposite side of the street, approximately 27 feet to the right (by my measurements) is a side street that intersects the road in front of the high school. The exit of the parking lot and the side street are not contiguous but rather parallel and offset by about 27 ft.

My 16-year-old daughter was ticketed for “failure to comply with a traffic control device” when she left the school parking lot and made a right turn (as required by law) followed by an almost immediate left turn onto the side street. My question is this: Is there a minimal distance one must travel after making the obligatory right turn before making a legal left turn (there is no prohibition against turning onto the side street).

Needless to say, I am very upset with this whole situation and the possible financial implications (loss of safe drivers discount from insurance company which could amount to thousands of dollars over the next several years). I truly believe that she complied with the law and intend to fight this in traffic court.

There are a couple of other issues in our favor, which I intend to bring up at trial. First is that there are two different traffic control devices that do not necessarily mean the same thing ("NO LEFT TURNS" and "RIGHT TURN ONLY") mounted at the same intersection but on opposite sides - one to the left and one to the right. In fact, my daughter initially only saw only the “NO LEFT TURNS” sign and completely missed the "RIGHT TURN ONLY" sign. Second, pursuant to statute 316.0745, Florida has adopted the MUTCD as a “uniform system of traffic control devices for use on the streets and highways of the state.” The MUTCD is very specific regarding position of traffic control devices and section 2A.18 states, “the clearance to the bottom of the sign shall be at least 2.1 m (7 ft)” and “The height to the bottom of a secondary sign mounted below another sign may be 0.3 m (1 ft) less than the height specified above.” So the height to the bottom of the “RIGHT TURN ONLY” sign should be 6 ft above the near surface of the pavement but was only 3’11” when we measured it. Furthermore, Florida statute 316.074 (3), the statute my daughter allegedly broke, states, “No provision of this chapter for which official traffic control devices are required shall be enforced against an alleged violator if at the time and place of the alleged violation an official device is not in proper position...” What does “not in proper position” mean? I would think it means, ‘not where the MUTCD says it should be’. Am I correct? I believe she should prevail solely on the merits of her case (we have ample photos documenting the intersection and proving our points) but is this ‘technicality’ enough for a dismissal?

Jay

[Zigner]

How many lanes does the street your daughter entered have?

[CdwJava]

Unless Florida is out of step with the rest of the nation, YOU cannot bring up anything at your daughter's trial. SHE can bring these issues up, but unless you are an attorney, you can't do anything of the sort. In fact, you're not even a witness to the event. Your daughter MIGHT be able to call you to witness the placement of the various signs, but odds are the officer will stipulate to that fact. or, you can just take pictures of the signs and their locations.

If you want to bring up the technical arguments, and FL law does no allow a parent to act on their child's behalf (and I doubt it does), I would strongly urge you to shell out for an attorney to make the argument. There may be a number of arguments that MIGHT prevail here. But, you will not likely be permitted to make any of them.

- Carl

[G8RJ]

Thanks for your timely replies. In response to your postings, both roads are 2 lane streets. Second, I hadn't even considered that I wouldn't be able speak on my daughters behalf. I just assumed that since she is a minor I could help her with her defense. Oh well, you know what they say about people who assume...

No I am not a lawyer, I'm a physician who has been doing a lot of research into traffic law since this incident occurred. I have poured over the Florida statutes and read the MUTCD (which I didn't even know existed 2 weeks ago!)

I am trying to teach my daughter proper life lessons which include standing up for yourself if you believe you are being victimized. If she had obviously broken a traffic law, I would be treating this much differently and she would have to accept responsibility for her actions (something that is sorely lacking in our modern society) just as my wife did a couple of weeks earlier when she was ticketed for turning right on red when there was a "NO TURN ON RED" sign posted. BTW, it's kind of ironic that my wife was ticketed for making a right turn and my daughter for not making a right turn! It's also hard to explain fairness when my daughter witnesses other students perform the same maneuver right in front of a police officer (albeit a different officer) and NOT receive a citation. Apparently some officers believe it to be a legal maneuver while others don't. If the legality of the action is vague and open to interpretation, it shouldn't be worthy of a ticket.

Jay

[CdwJava]

It's also hard to explain fairness when my daughter witnesses other students perform the same maneuver right in front of a police officer (albeit a different officer) and NOT receive a citation. Apparently some officers believe it to be a legal maneuver while others don't. If the legality of the action is vague and open to interpretation, it shouldn't be worthy of a ticket.

I can help explain that.

It's not a matter of fairness, it's a matter of discretion. The police can not possibly catch every violator, so they catch those that they can and those that commit the more heinous offenses. it could be that the officer present on those days was there looking for something else - not traffic infractions. The police are frequently tasked to park near schools when they start and let out - the theory being that their presence would help to deter problems. I recall writing reports as I was parked near a school ... so I wasn't watching for violations, I was just there because my sergeant told me to be there.

It could also be that the other officers did not believe it was a violation, and the officer did. This could be because the one officer that cited your daughter knew more than the others, or, that he knew less (or was operating under a misconception ... even officers get bad info - often from their DA or city attorney).

And there are MANY issues of the law that are open to interpretation - such as the law of arrest, for instance! The probable cause necessary to make an arrest is a subjective one, and NOT an objective one. The situation must be articulated, but it cannot be spelled out A, B, C in most cases.

Nothing about law enforcement is necessarily "fair". If we had to operate under the doctrine that we could not cite this person because those people got away with it, we could never write citations. I recall quite a few instances where I'd have someone pulled over and then we'd witness others performing the same maneuver that got my guy a cite. It's just not possible to get everyone.

The best way to avoid a cite is to follow the law. And, as I wrote previously, there may be some ways to fight this one based on the signage, but it is not likely YOU who will be able to present it. I am not familiar enough with FL juvenile court rules to say that you WON'T be able to make a defense on her behalf, but I would think it highly unlikely for a number of legal reasons. You might consider consulting an attorney.

- Carl

[Zigner]

Just to be on record - I think your daughter made an *improper* right turn (based on what you posted)...but it WAS a right turn