 | 
10-03-2006, 03:14 AM
| | Junior Member | | Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 5
| | | Suffolk County, NY confusing ticket for 1180(a)
What is the name of your state? New York (TVB system)
Hey guys, I'm hoping someone might be able to give me some insight. A month ago, I was pulled over for supposedly speeding. The cop kept telling me to "man up" and admit I was speeding, and that he "isn't stupid". Well I didn't admit anything. He came back with a ticket which said "speed not reasonable and prudent" and under the "in violation of" part it says "section 1180, sub. (a)" which is "speed not reasonable and prudent". Normally, when a cop gives a ticket for 1180(d), he will use the little space where it says "speed __ in a __ zone". For some reason, he put 60 in a 30 there, even though he is accusing me of 1180(a).
I mailed my ticket in marked "NOT GUILTY" and got a letter back with my court date. Under "Violation Description" it says "SPEED IN ZONE 11-30". Can they do this? The speed should not be the relevant factor here. He gave me a ticket for not traveling at a reasonable or prudent speed. The NYS website describes an 1180(a) as follows:
Can I be ticketed for speeding if I am not actually exceeding the posted speed limit?
Yes. Vehicle and Traffic Law section 1180(a) requires that: "No person shall drive a vehicle at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the conditions and having regard to the actual and potential hazards then existing." Where this very often comes into play is during the winter months when the roadway is slippery due to ice and/or snow. Under these conditions, and others like them, motorists are required to reduce their speed – even to a speed below the posted speed limit - to a speed that is reasonable and prudent, that is, to a speed at which the motorist can maintain control of the vehicle despite inclement road or weather conditions.
An 1180(a) ticket is not so much for speeding, as it is for not reducing your speed in hazardous conditions. There was no inclement weather or anything that night.... It was perfectly clear and dry.
How can they accuse me of one thing now, when the cop accused me of something else before? This might not be very clear cut, so let me use this example: If I was given a ticket for using a cell phone while driving, how can they say "oh he should have received a ticket for speeding". This doesn't make any sense!
In any case, I appreciate any and all input. Thanks! |
10-03-2006, 03:23 AM
| | Senior Member | | Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,310
| | | I'm confused. You were accused of going 60 in a 30 (which is clearly speeding), and the ticket you got was for not going a reasonable and prudent speed (*cough*speeding*cough*). What exactly is the problem here? |
10-03-2006, 03:26 AM
| | Junior Member | | Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 5
| | | 1180(a) "speed not reasonable and prudent" is not the same as 1180(d)"speed in zone" |
10-03-2006, 03:28 AM
| | Junior Member | | Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 5
| | | oh and 1180(a) is independent of speed...... it is 3 points and a fixed fine. 1180(d) on the other hand has varying points with speed, as well as fines...... |
10-03-2006, 08:12 AM
| | Member | | Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: MD, WV - formerly WA, UT, AL, MS and OR
Posts: 563
| | | Well, you do have your citation right? It does seem to show a uncertain and possibly incompetant prosecution but now they seem to have changed the mistake charge to one they can attempt to prosecute.
I can email you some case law regarding the foundation for evidence for speed measurement in NY, perhaps that is a better defense strategy. |
10-03-2006, 09:39 AM
| | Senior Member | | Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 7,574
| | | If this entire argument is stemming from the letter advising you of your court date, then what most likely occurred is a clerk hit the wrong key when inputting your citation. Unless/until amended, the citation controls. The court letter is not evidence of anything, and certainly not a defense to the citation. Your best bet is to call the TVB, tell them about their error, and see what they do to rectify it.
In any event, the "1180(a) only applies in bad weather" defense really isn't one you want to be pursuing - unless you enjoy being found guilty.
__________________ Quote: |
Originally Posted by me Then start crying uncontrollably. If that doesn't work, fill your pants with shaving cream and start screaming about the voices in your head. Maybe they'll feel bad enough about your other problems and let you out of the ticket. | |
10-03-2006, 10:23 AM
| | Junior Member | | Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 5
| | | well my argument was going to be that i was traveling at the maximum speed limit (30). since it was not raining or snowing, i would have no reason to travel at speeds BELOW the posted speed limit (which is what the ticket is actually for). there were no existing conditions which would warrant my reduction of speed. obviously i will not be arguing that i was speeding, and that it's ok since it was clear and dry out! he didn't even use radar or laser (i have a v1 which didn't go off) so chances are this is just a bogus ticket. |
10-03-2006, 10:27 AM
| | Junior Member | | Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 5
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by cepe10  Well, you do have your citation right? It does seem to show a uncertain and possibly incompetant prosecution but now they seem to have changed the mistake charge to one they can attempt to prosecute.
I can email you some case law regarding the foundation for evidence for speed measurement in NY, perhaps that is a better defense strategy. | if you could do that, i would appreciate it very much! |
10-03-2006, 10:32 AM
| | Member | | Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: MD, WV - formerly WA, UT, AL, MS and OR
Posts: 563
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffk if you could do that, i would appreciate it very much! | email me @ [email]cepe10@myway.com[/email] and I'll sent it . |
10-03-2006, 11:29 AM
| | Senior Member | | Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 7,574
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffk well my argument was going to be that i was traveling at the maximum speed limit (30). since it was not raining or snowing, i would have no reason to travel at speeds BELOW the posted speed limit (which is what the ticket is actually for). there were no existing conditions which would warrant my reduction of speed. obviously i will not be arguing that i was speeding, and that it's ok since it was clear and dry out! he didn't even use radar or laser (i have a v1 which didn't go off) so chances are this is just a bogus ticket. | That's the rub with your defense - rain and snow are merely two of a laundry list of potential "excuses" the officer could come up with regarding driving conditions. They can also claim other cars, construction, road debris, road condition, glare, animals, etc...
On the bright side is that because such tickets are so subjective, you can usually work out a favorable plea on them, usually something along the lines of a "failure to obey traffic device" or some similar 2-pointer. Occassionally, (if you have a spotless 30+ year driving record; if you catch the TVB on a good day; or if you're a chick with a huge rack), you can plea it down to a non-moving violation (but I wouldn't bank on it).
__________________ Quote: |
Originally Posted by me Then start crying uncontrollably. If that doesn't work, fill your pants with shaving cream and start screaming about the voices in your head. Maybe they'll feel bad enough about your other problems and let you out of the ticket. | | |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | | | | Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes | Rate This Thread |  Linear Mode | | 
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off | | | |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:23 AM.
