Speeding: 38 in a 35 (IL)

[JLR80]

What is the name of your state?What is the name of your state? IL

I.V.C. 625 ILCS5/: 11-601(b) SPEEDING "38" MPH IN A "35" MPH ZONE

I would appreciate some advice on a citation I received Monday (08/15) for speeding. I was coming into a rural IL community and was stopped about 1/2 mile into the town by an IL State Police trooper. The trooper asked my what my hurry was and then asked me if I knew how fast I was going. Jokingly, I told him that I was probably doing 39 or 40 (I didn't expect a few MPH over the limit to be a citation), and then he tells me I was clocked at 38 MPH in a 35 MPH zone. He proceeded to inform me that this would be a citation today. Under the "Incident Notations," he marked "admitted doing 40." Method was marked "Radar" for speed enforcement on the citation.

When he brought the citation back, I asked him if the ticket wasn't a bit absurd and he told me that the traffic death toll was way up in the area and pressure was being put on the district commander to get people to slow down in Livingston County. He then told me that I could appear in court if I wish to contest the ticket, etc.

Q) I'm not disputing the fact that I was speeding, but isn't this amount (3 MPH over!!) a bit ridiculous?

Q) Should I contest the ticket on the grounds that there are differences between speedometer and radar or go to court, pay the fine ($75 plus court costs) and ask for the diversion?

I am 24 years old and this is my first moving violation in 9 years of being a licensed driver. I have a friend who is a police officer and he informed me that the judge may drop the ticket for less than 5 MPH over the limit (no one in their department even gets out of the car for less than 6 MPH over), but since I did admit guilt that could change the outcome.

Thanks for any advice that might be offered,

JLR

[poppakeith]

Originally Posted by JLR80

What is the name of your state?What is the name of your state? IL
I am 24 years old and this is my first moving violation in 9 years of being a licensed driver. I have a friend who is a police officer and he informed me that the judge may drop the ticket for less than 5 MPH over the limit (no one in their department even gets out of the car for less than 6 MPH over), but since I did admit guilt that could change the outcome.
JLR

Traffic fines, aside from being a source of local revenue, are designed to induce the public to drive in a safe manner, and statutes attempt to define the behaviors calculated to be in the safe range. 38MPH at the location of your citation, on a dry day with light traffic would likely be less a threat/risk to public safety than 20 in the rain. A good judge will evaluate the driver, the record and the conditions involved, and he/she does have the power to figure your hassle at coming to court sufficient penalty, refreshes you on the need to stay closer to closer to the letter of law, as you have for 9 years stayed with the spirit of it, and to let you off with a warning. You have no defense. Mercy of the court is the only hope you've got.

[JLR80]

Thanks for the advice. I've spoke with another state trooper closer to where I live and he basically gave the same advice (appear and enter a guilty plea), since I already admitted guilt (the fatal flaw in his opinion - but they are trained to ask "leading questions"). He thinks some of those tickets could successfully be challenged if the offender decides to appear and contest the ticket + did not admit any guilt. Interesting enough, he also informed me that in IL these types of tickets (speeding MINOR amounts over the posted limit, like 3-6 MPH ) could become more common in certain areas since a line has to be drawn somewhere, speed related fatalities are on the rise and in the end crap rolls downhill.

Although I do feel 3 MPH over the limit is a bit picky to say the least, I guess it's not necessary to waste much time and taxpayer resources battling it out. However, I will post a response when I'm finished with my appearance just to update everyone on the outcome.

POLICE OFFICERS/LEGAL EXPERTS ON THE FORUM:

I'm curious, what is your opinion? Should there be a grace area for speeding (like up to 5 MPH over the posted limit results in only a warning)?

[Curt581]

Originally Posted by JLR80

POLICE OFFICERS/LEGAL EXPERTS ON THE FORUM:

I'm curious, what is your opinion? Should there be a grace area for speeding (like up to 5 MPH over the posted limit results in only a warning)?

In my area, it's known as a "tolerance", and yes, we do have them.

My own is:

A citation is guaranteed at 20 or more over. There is no way you didn't know you were speeding. NO excuses will work.

A citation at 16 to 19 over, unless there a REALLY creative excuse... one I haven't heard before.

A warning is most likely at 11 to 15 over, unless the driver is belligerent or sarcastic.

10 or less over... I won't even bother stopping you.

I agree stopping someone for 3 mph over the limit is ridiculous. Brand new cars have a speedometer error of plus or minus 3-5 mph.

I have heard that Ohio State Patrol will cite at 3 or more over, but if someone in my agency did it and his coworkers found out about it, the ragging and practical jokes would never end. They'd make his life a living Hell.

[poohmantbb]

I agree the three miles over is picky, but to offer a written grace zone, that would defeat the purpose of a speed limit. I also don't stop for less than 12 or 13 over, but if I do, and the driver is an ass, you bet I'll put a $100 ticket in his hands for 3 or 5 over. A lot of it is attitude (as our job is to gain "voluntary compliance"). If it is obvious a warning will not hange the behavior, the only other method would be to hit the wallet.

Was your attitude any part of the reason for this ticket?

[JLR80]

Originally Posted by poohmantbb

I agree the three miles over is picky, but to offer a written grace zone, that would defeat the purpose of a speed limit. I also don't stop for less than 12 or 13 over, but if I do, and the driver is an ass, you bet I'll put a $100 ticket in his hands for 3 or 5 over. A lot of it is attitude (as our job is to gain "voluntary compliance"). If it is obvious a warning will not hange the behavior, the only other method would be to hit the wallet.

Was your attitude any part of the reason for this ticket?

I probably should have posted that as a disclaimer, as I figured that would come up.

A) Absolutely not. I was courteous and professional with the trooper (as was he), in fact overly polite in a sense. The only think I said that could have been misconstrued as questioning his authority was stating that I felt a citation for 3 MPH was a bit "absurd" (exact word used), but this was after I was already being issued a citation anyhow. Even at that remark, he politely informed me (I do think he acted a bit embarassed) that he basically had no choice as the district post commander wanted the speed problem in the area corrected and people slowed down to compliance with the posted limits as the traffic death toll in the area was evidently elevated. I'm assuming he offered this information because he knew a ticket for 3 MPH over the posted limit was a tad harsh under normal circumstances. I should also note that it was a dry, sunny day and conditions were normal.

[Robbie0723]

One of the purposes of an enforcement tolerance is to accommodate inaccuracy's in the measurement equipment. No measurement device is 100% accurate and it could be difficult to prove the certainty of the measurement to be better than +-3 mph for moving radar. Traffic lawyers know how to best take advantage of this situation for their clients

A stop puts both you and the officer at significantly higher risk than speeding 3 over. More officers a killed in this situation than by guns. It sounds like the trooper was acting as ordered. If Ohio has a policy that unnecessarily places the safety troopers and the public at risk for 3 over, I would fight the ticket to encourage changing the policy.

[Pugilist]

I am in CA, know nuthing about OH law, but am going to assume for purposes of this discussion that if we here in CA have had a law for 20 years or more, OH probably has a similar one.

Here we have a basic speed law. It says that whatever speed you were doing is OK as long as you can show it was safe for the weather and other conditions. That means that at some times (blizzard) even 20 mph in a 35 would not be OK. It also means that your 38, if appropriate for the conditions, would be perfectly OK.

Here we also have a speed trap law that applies to radar tickets. It says that the police cannot use radar to enforce a speed limit unless that speed limit has been established per an engineering survey that says the posted speed is at or below what 85% of drivers do AND not so low as to make violators of the "reasonable majority of drivers." (People v. Goulet). In other words, you cannot post a 35 limit if the survey says that 51% of all drivers normally exceed that speed. There is an exception, though. They can possibly post a lower limit if the survey shows a higher-than-average rate of accidents, or other risk factors (a blind curve, hidden driveway) that would not be apparent to a driver.

I would fight the ticket. I would start by calling the auto club and complaining about the speed trap. I would call my state legislator and complain. I would also put the speed trap up on the speedtrap.org website. And I would get a copy of the survey for the street (assuming of course that OH has a law that requires surveys).

One more thing. It is possible he profiled you because of your color, age, type of car?

Good luck.

Pug

[Curt581]

Originally Posted by Pugilist

I am in CA, know nuthing about OH law, but am going to assume for purposes of this discussion that if we here in CA have had a law for 20 years or more, OH probably has a similar one.

You're right, you don't. You also can't assume Ohio has a similar law... making your entire post irrelevant.

Here we have a basic speed law. It says that whatever speed you were doing is OK as long as you can show it was safe for the weather and other conditions. That means that at some times (blizzard) even 20 mph in a 35 would not be OK. It also means that your 38, if appropriate for the conditions, would be perfectly OK.

Doubtful... but again, totally irrelevant.

He's not asking about California, he's asking about Ohio.

Here we also have a speed trap law that applies to radar tickets. It says that the police cannot use radar to enforce a speed limit unless that speed limit has been established per an engineering survey that says the posted speed is at or below what 85% of drivers do AND not so low as to make violators of the "reasonable majority of drivers." (People v. Goulet). In other words, you cannot post a 35 limit if the survey says that 51% of all drivers normally exceed that speed. There is an exception, though. They can possibly post a lower limit if the survey shows a higher-than-average rate of accidents, or other risk factors (a blind curve, hidden driveway) that would not be apparent to a driver.

What part of OHIO do you not understand?

I would.... I would.... I would... I would also... And I would... (assuming of course that OH has a law that requires surveys).

Proving for the forty-third time that you're a complete and utter buffoon.

One more thing. It is possible he profiled you because of your color, age, type of car?

Yeah... that's it... when all else fails, play the race card.



PS: You forgot to tell him to buy the Book.

[Pugilist]

Curt finished his rant with "you forgot to tell him to buy the book."

That's a reference to the fact that I nearly always tell people to go see their reference librarian, who will be able to supply books on fighting tickets.

And I do recommend doing that in this case.

Pug

[poppakeith]

Originally Posted by Pugilist

I am in CA, know nuthing about OH law, but am going to assume for purposes of this discussion that if we here in CA have had a law for 20 years or more, OH probably has a similar one.....
Pug

Pug,
Thanks for taking the time to discuss this matter in depth. Though sticking specifically to what is the letter of law would better satisfy some, those who come to this forum without training in law are best served if they can receive some understanding of what is rational in the law and what is irrational in utilization of police powers. Fines and court appearances do contribute to public safety on the streets, but we must keep in mind that a multitude of good and lawful drivers simply respect others, and will remain that way so long if they are not abused by unreasoned enforcement events. Respect is a two way street.

[JLR80]

All of the responses have been helpful - Thanks again!

I've decided that from an economical standpoint, it makes more sense to mail in the fine ($75) + court costs and request the diversion. The county seat is 160 miles away from where I live, so I would have to take a personal day off of work (we only receive two per school year) and drive approximately 320 miles round trip to appeal the ticket. With the price of gasoline at $2.70 gallon, I'm looking at $67.50 in gas for a 25 gallon trip.

Since I mistakenly admitted guilt, there is still a possibility that I would have to schedule another hearing if the court decided to allow me to contest the ticket and by chance it wasn't automatically dropped.

This may be a totally ignorant question (mind you I am not intimately familiar with the process), but if the judge by change agreed this was an unreasonable enforcement effort, would there be even a slight chance that the citation would be completely dropped and I would be issued a refund?

[ljt99]

Originally Posted by Curt581

He's not asking about California, he's asking about Ohio.

What part of OHIO do you not understand?

Curt581, not to be rude but the poster is not asking about Ohio, they are asking about Illinois. It's not the same state.

By the way, I checked out "the book" from the library and my speeding ticket was dismissed.

[ljt99]

Originally Posted by JLR80

This may be a totally ignorant question (mind you I am not intimately familiar with the process), but if the judge by change agreed this was an unreasonable enforcement effort, would there be even a slight chance that the citation would be completely dropped and I would be issued a refund?

JLR80, I'm not a judge, a lawyer, or even a court employee but I am 100% confident that if you opt out of appearing in court, and send in the fine, there is zero chance of the court refunding your money. There is probably zero chance of any judge ever even knowing about your ticket. I'm not being facetious, just realistic about the way counties collect revenue from speeding tickets. Once they've got it, they don't like to give it back.

[Pugilist]

I am putting on my fireproof suit, and waiting for the flames, but I am going to continue my comparison to CA law.

(And although it didn't make any difference, I apoligize to Ohio and Ohioans for my previous reply making it look like the Mickey Mouse violation happened in OH.)

In CA we have something called Trial by Declaration. You write up and mail your defense in to the court. No personal appearance needed. If you lose, you can even ask for another shot at it, called a Trial de Novo. Maybe IL has that too (we in CA probably didn't invent it).

Bring on the flames, Curt.

Pub