Tickets help

[xtremal]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? New York
I will explain everything to you any advice would be appreciated.
Okay so this is the first time i ever got pulled over. It happened last week on Friday in the morning at like 4am and there were no other cars. I got pulled over on the highway I-90. The speed limit was 55mph and i was going 82. When he pulled me over he said i was going 82 on a 55 and why i was driving so fast and i said i didn't even realize i was going so fast. Then he told me to step out of the car and saw the x'es on my hands so he realized i was coming back from a club so he tested me to see if i was drinking. Then i got back in the car and after a few minutes he came back with 2 tickets. One for speeding and one for changing lanes with no signals. He provided me with a supporting deposition for both tickets. The one is SPEEDING (Gen 101) and the other one is GENERAL (Gen 101 A). They show everything like information about my car and what direction i was going and where i got pulled over. They are both based on officers direct observation and the speeding is verified by a radar stalker dual.
For additional information it says SUBJECT WAS STOPPED FOR 82 IN A POSTED 55 MPH ZONE VISUAL EST 80 REAR RADAR ANTENNA 82 - SHOULDER 423 EAST SAME LANE 82
and for the no signal one it says SUBJECT WENT FROM LEFT LANE TO THE MIDDLE LANE, BACK TO LEFT THEN MIDDLE, NO SIGNAL WHILE TRAVELING 82MPH IN A 55.
I don't know what to do but i will plead not guilty because i cant afford to pay the full amount for those tickets; i don't know how much exactly it would be but it should be like $300 for the speeding and like $100 for no signals.
Please tell me what to do and what to say at the trial because this is my first time and i don't know what to do.
I am 18 years old and I've had my license for like a little more than a year.

 

[HighwayMan]

The one is SPEEDING (Gen 101) and the other one is GENERAL (Gen 101 A)

What does this mean???? What is "Gen 101" and "Gen 101 A"? That has no meaning.

Sounds like the officer or trooper got you dead to rights.

Go for a pre-trial conference if the court in question has those and see what kind of reduction the prosecutor offers you. That is your only reasonable chance to get any kind of a break.

 

[xtremal]

That is the type of the supporting deposition. And ahh that sucks i guess ill try that.. Is there any way to avoid getting points on my license?
And what should i say at the trial?

 

[HighwayMan]

You will not be having a trial at this point. It is a PRE-TRIAL conference.

If a state trooper wrote you you won't be able to speak with him. If a police officer or deputy wrote you you will speak to that officer/deputy more than likely. If not then you will speak to a prosecutor.

It is up to the individual who conferences with you to offer you a deal. Whether that will include a plea to charges that don't involve points is impossible to say.

If you don't like the offer than you can go to trial. Based on what you've said the outcome of the trial will not be to your liking.

 

[xtremal]

So he doesnt even have to show up to court?
But yeah i have no clue what im gonna do then
im just gonna go to respond to my ticket today or tomorrow and see what happens later

 

[wrongsometimes]

Being poor is not a defense ... think of something else

 

[xtremal]

Yeah i guess not but i dont know i was thinking maybe i could say something like that i didnt realize that i was going so fast cause it was like 4 in the morning and there were no other cars and i wasnt paying much attention cause i was getting tired or something like that i dont know if you can think of something better let me know

 

[wrongsometimes]

Yeah i guess not but i dont know i was thinking maybe i could say something like that i didnt realize that i was going so fast cause it was like 4 in the morning and there were no other cars and i wasnt paying much attention cause i was getting tired or something like that i dont know if you can think of something better let me know

NO ! That's an admission of guilt. You don't have to offer an explanation -- they have to prove you are guilty.

Stop trying to tell a story .. in fact, you should not even testify..especially with you -- millions of excuses & not looking into an actual defense.

 

[xtremal]

NO ! That's an admission of guilt. You don't have to offer an explanation -- they have to prove you are guilty.

Stop trying to tell a story .. in fact, you should not even testify..especially with you -- millions of excuses & not looking into an actual defense.

Well don't they already have a proof? It is stated in the ticket that i was going 82 on a 55 and that it is based on officers direct observation verified by a radar.
And of course they are going to take his words over mine

 

[xtremal]

Can i just say that i believe i was traveling at a safe speed for the conditions? that way at least im not admitting im guilty
and for the no signal i was thinking i could say that i mighve let it blink just once and maybe he didnt notice because my blinkers are my tail lights
and the codes sections for the speeding is 1180B and for the no signal its 1163D

 

[davidmcbeth3]

Can i just say that i believe i was traveling at a safe speed for the conditions? that way at least im not admitting im guilty
and for the no signal i was thinking i could say that i mighve let it blink just once and maybe he didnt notice because my blinkers are my tail lights
and the codes sections for the speeding is 1180B and for the no signal its 1163D

Well, you are thinking of a viable defense. If it was in KY, the "traveling at a safe speed" is a possible defense. I don't think NY has the same "max. speed statue" but you can investigate.

In Calf. there have been cases, basically based on Melendez-Diaz & Crawford SCOTUS opinions (read the Borazakian & Khlad cases from CA to see if you understand the reasoning behind them). Now, you have a speeding ticket but I think the same principles are involved when an officer wishes to proffer up a certificate of calibration for the SMD (whatever it may be). So you can attack the supporting documentation of the SMD via this type of "confrontation" under our federal constitution and also on foundation grounds. The state also has to show that the SMD is OK via either citing a case giving it judicial notice OR having an expert testify (hardly ever done). The cop is not an expert.

Attacking his visual estimate may not be needed but should be done (is visual good enough in NY?).

If LIDAR is used I think you would have a better chance.

In reality, if YOU have to testify, your case is lost anyway.

 

[Hot Topic]

"And of course they're going to take his words over mine."

You're not a victim. You're a punk who's trying to weasel out of legitimate traffic violations. You could have killed somebody. Guess you never thought of that.

 

[xtremal]

Well i couldn't find any information about those cases but thats ok i guess im just gonna go with what i said and whatever happens happens
And even if his visual is not good enough like i said its verified by a radar so i dont think the visual matters.
And i couldnt have killed anybody i was on the i 90 at 4 in the morning where the speed limit was 55 or 65 somewhere and there wasnt any other cars or people so yeah and the weather was nice it wasnt raining or snowing or anything

 

[Zigner]

Well i couldn't find any information about those cases...

Sorry that the prior poster led you on a wild goose chase. CA cases don't have any bearing on NY anyway.

 

[HighwayMan]

I don't think NY has the same "max. speed statue" but you can investigate.

Doesn't exist here. There is no such thing. There is no excuse for violating a clearly posted speed limit.

In Calf. there have been cases...

Irrelevant here in New York.

Attacking his visual estimate may not be needed but should be done (is visual good enough in NY?).

Visual estimate alone is sufficient for a conviction.

If LIDAR is used I think you would have a better chance.

LIDAR is more difficult to fight than radar is. Your statement makes no sense.