Texas - Running red light vs. no right on red

[seventensplit]

Hi all,

From Texas here.

I was stopped over a year ago in Downtown Ft Worth. It was around 1 a.m. and I was coming up to the light of two intersecting one-way streets, A cop had someone pulled over in the right hand lane a few dozen feet behind the intersection. So, I pulled to the light in the next nearest lane, happy to have found a street that i could find my way home from. I stopped at the light, made sure there was no coming traffic, and made my right turn onto the main street. The cop, apparently finished with the other guy, came around the corner and pulled me over. I was like, "what the...?" I rolled down my window and he asked if I knew there was no right turn on red at that intersection. I told him I didn't know that, or see the sign. He said he was going to have to ticket me, and that he would normally have let it go, but i had done it right in front of him.

When i looked at the ticket at home, the violation read code 30 - Ran Red Light. Now, I had fully stopped at that signal. What I *had* done, was make an illegal right-turn-on-red, which has its own violation code: 31 - Right/Left turn on Red.

What I was wanting to know, is can I use that error to get it thrown out? The police car camera should be able to back up my claim of having stopped, not ran it. If the two were the same thing, they wouldn't have separate offense codes, would they?
Could they fine me for something i didn't do?
And, do I need to request discovery of the tape to use in the hearing?
Of interesting note, it was the only one of the four closest streets ending at that main street to have that sign, as i found out later that week when i went back to see it.

Thanks for any useful info,
SevenTen!

[AlanShore]

Originally Posted by seventensplit

What I was wanting to know, is can I use that error to get it thrown out?

NO.

Originally Posted by seventensplit

The police car camera should be able to back up my claim of having stopped, not ran it.

The Police Camera would only prove you are guilty. Even if you stopped, you still "ran" the light.

Originally Posted by seventensplit

If the two were the same thing, they wouldn't have separate offense codes, would they?

Yes. He could probably charge you with both.

Originally Posted by seventensplit

Could they fine me for something i didn't do?

Well sure, but not till after you had an opportunity to prove your innocence.

Originally Posted by seventensplit

And, do I need to request discovery of the tape to use in the hearing?

No, Call them and tell them you want to use the tape in court. I AM SURE THE DEPARTMENT WILL BE GLAD TO GIVE THEM TO YOU. (hint: it prove your guilt)

Originally Posted by seventensplit

Of interesting note, it was the only one of the four closest streets ending at that main street to have that sign, as i found out later that week when i went back to see it.

Wow. Really?

[camdenle]

You are correct - it is a different offense and you should get aquital on the charge you have against you. They also can not generally amend the charge on the spot in court - it would have to be a separate summons, which is unlikely. In traffic court there is not a lot of time to do things like that and you should object if they try. You have a good chance at dismissal. You can probably get the officer to testify that you stopped during questioning so no need for the tape.

[AlanShore]

Originally Posted by camdenle

You are correct - it is a different offense and you should get aquital on the charge you have against you. They also can not generally amend the charge on the spot in court - it would have to be a separate summons, which is unlikely. In traffic court there is not a lot of time to do things like that and you should object if they try. You have a good chance at dismissal. You can probably get the officer to testify that you stopped during questioning so no need for the tape.

That is very wrong.

[The Occultist]

Originally Posted by camdenle

You are correct - it is a different offense and you should get aquital on the charge you have against you. They also can not generally amend the charge on the spot in court - it would have to be a separate summons, which is unlikely. In traffic court there is not a lot of time to do things like that and you should object if they try. You have a good chance at dismissal. You can probably get the officer to testify that you stopped during questioning so no need for the tape.

Haha! You're kidding, right? There is no need to amend the charge because the charge fits the crime! If the light was red, and the OP drove through it, then the OP ran a red light. I don't see why we're having such a hard time grasping this concept.

[garrula lingua]

You were stopped over a YEAR ago ?

How the heck did you keep the citation/court appearance/trial rolling for a YEAR ?

[The Occultist]

Originally Posted by garrula lingua

You were stopped over a YEAR ago ?

How the heck did you keep the citation/court appearance/trial rolling for a YEAR ?

Wow, I didn't even notice that. That is a very good question!

[cepe10]

Originally Posted by AlanShore

That is very wrong.

Actually you are wrong and the OP is correct.

You can't write the charge against the generic 544.007 type charge because after stopping and yeilding an operator may turn right against a red light.

§ 544.007. TRAFFIC-CONTROL SIGNALS IN GENERAL. (a) A
traffic-control signal displaying different colored lights or
colored lighted arrows successively or in combination may display
only green, yellow, or red and applies to operators of vehicles as
provided by this section.
(b) An operator of a vehicle facing a circular green signal
may proceed straight or turn right or left unless a sign prohibits
the turn. The operator shall yield the right-of-way to other
vehicles and to pedestrians lawfully in the intersection or an
adjacent crosswalk when the signal is exhibited.
(c) An operator of a vehicle facing a green arrow signal,
displayed alone or with another signal, may cautiously enter the
intersection to move in the direction permitted by the arrow or
other indication shown simultaneously. The operator shall yield
the right-of-way to a pedestrian lawfully in an adjacent crosswalk
and other traffic lawfully using the intersection.
(d) An operator of a vehicle facing only a steady red signal
shall stop at a clearly marked stop line. In the absence of a stop
line, the operator shall stop before entering the crosswalk on the
near side of the intersection. A vehicle that is not turning shall
remain standing until an indication to proceed is shown. After
stopping, standing until the intersection may be entered safely,
and yielding right-of-way to pedestrians lawfully in an adjacent
crosswalk and other traffic lawfully using the intersection, the
operator may:
(1) turn right; or

Here is a wikipedia article for your information regarding right on red turn movements.
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_turn_on_red[/url]

Like the OP said noncompliance with the prohibition sign is a separate offense - they are indicated by the (§ 544.007) like numbers when you read the code or local statutes -The law is what it is (as in writing) - not what you wish, imagine or invent it to be.

[Zigner]

Originally Posted by cepe10

Like the OP said noncompliance with the prohibition sign is a separate offense

Cepe and OP are correct - OP should have been charged with BOTH offenses!

[AlanShore]

Originally Posted by Zigner

Cepe and OP are correct - OP should have been charged with BOTH offenses!

Correct!!!!!

[camdenle]

Originally Posted by Zigner

Cepe and OP are correct - OP should have been charged with BOTH offenses!

So you stop and remain stopped at red lights when turning right even when it is clear to proceed??? How bizarre... You must get a lot of people honking at you....

Since like the statutes says (After stopping, standing until the intersection may be entered safely, and yielding right-of-way to pedestrians lawfully in an adjacent crosswalk and other traffic lawfully using the intersection, the operator may: (1) turn right against the red light.

Other Prohibitions based on Other traffic control devices and signage are SEPARATE citations under the Statutes!

[AlanShore]

Originally Posted by camdenle

So you stop and remain stopped at red lights when turning right even when it is clear to proceed??? How bizarre... You must get a lot of people honking at you....

Since like the statutes says (After stopping, standing until the intersection may be entered safely, and yielding right-of-way to pedestrians lawfully in an adjacent crosswalk and other traffic lawfully using the intersection, the operator may: (1) turn right against the red light.

Other Prohibitions based on Other traffic control devices and signage are SEPARATE citations under the Statutes!

You are wrong (for the 100th time on this forum). They are seperate statutes but the op could be charges with either, or.

[The Occultist]

If a sign says you may not turn right on red, that means you are no longer allowed to proceed on a red for ANY reason, and proceed across a red light when you are not allowed to is running a red light. The OP could have been charged with both offenses, and was lucky enough to only be charged with one.