Unreasonable Acceleration

jiggageorge · #1 10-26-2006, 09:15 AM

What is the name of your state? MN

So I was pulled over yesterday in Minneapolis by one of three officers standing on the side of Penn Avenue as I was headed back to the office from lunch. As I approached where they were stationed one officer walked into the street and waved me to pull over. He told me I was doing 42 in a 35 (may have been 30) zone and I was getting a ticket for speeding. Anyhow, he gave me my ticket and I left and went back to work. As I was driving to work, I noticed the ordinance he cited was "unreasonable acceleration". I was initially about 1/4 mile away at a stop light when they probably started clocking me but I absolutely didn't unreasonably accelerate. From what I've read the prima facie evidence has to do with squeeling your tires; well with the type of car I drive (a4 quattro), it's nearly impossible to spin my tires unless there is snow on the ground.

Long story short, I'd like to fight this is court to see if I can have it dismissed. For one, he cited me differently than why he told me I was pulled over. Secondly, it's not possible for me to squeel or chirp my tires which would constiture "unreasonable acceleration".

Any advice would be appreciated.

HappyHusband · #2 10-26-2006, 01:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jiggageorge

What is the name of your state? MN

So I was pulled over yesterday in Minneapolis by one of three officers standing on the side of Penn Avenue as I was headed back to the office from lunch. As I approached where they were stationed one officer walked into the street and waved me to pull over. He told me I was doing 42 in a 35 (may have been 30) zone and I was getting a ticket for speeding. Anyhow, he gave me my ticket and I left and went back to work. As I was driving to work, I noticed the ordinance he cited was "unreasonable acceleration". I was initially about 1/4 mile away at a stop light when they probably started clocking me but I absolutely didn't unreasonably accelerate. From what I've read the prima facie evidence has to do with squeeling your tires; well with the type of car I drive (a4 quattro), it's nearly impossible to spin my tires unless there is snow on the ground.

Long story short, I'd like to fight this is court to see if I can have it dismissed. For one, he cited me differently than why he told me I was pulled over. Secondly, it's not possible for me to squeel or chirp my tires which would constiture "unreasonable acceleration".

Any advice would be appreciated.

For one, he cited me differently than why he told me I was pulled over.

Irrelevant.

Secondly, it's not possible for me to squeel or chirp my tires which would constiture "unreasonable acceleration".

I'd use that defense, but you should read the entire ordinance to verify that there are no other "elements" of "unreasonable acceleration", such as officer's visual of your car doing something crazy.
Can you see how racing from redlight to redlight, without exceeding the speed limit or losing traction, could be seen as "unreasonable acceleration"?

I was pulled over once for "unreasonable deceleration" because I down-shifted quickly, causing the rear tires to chirp.
The officer let me go because I showed that I was avoiding the idiot parked in the middle of the street, and not that I was slamming on my brakes to stop for the redlight ahead. Also because it was Thanksgiving night and he only stopped me to see if I had been drinking.

jiggageorge · #3 10-26-2006, 05:33 PM

Well, I've copied the ordinance into this page. It seems pretty clear to me that I did not break the ordinance that I was cited for. "474.30. Starting and acceleration.No person shall start or accelerate any motor vehicle with an unnecessary exhibition of speed on any public or private way within the city limits. Prima facie evidence of such unnecessary exhibition of speed shall be unreasonable squealing or screeching sounds emitted by the tires or the throwing of sand or gravel by the tires of said vehicle or both. (Code 1960, As Amend., § 403.025; Ord. of 1-31-75, § 1)"

LSCAP · #4 10-26-2006, 09:28 PM

Explain that you had just finished lunch and were in no hurry to go back to work. Nobody else (the other cars) seemed in a hurry either.
Tell him it is a sporty looking sedan which seems to draw attention, but you didn’t spin your tires or throw up sand. And you accelerated in a normal manner.

You don’t have to be an expert to know it is very hard to spin the wheels on a four wheel drive car, but that would be a negative defense, as that suggests why you didn’t spin your tires or throw up sand when you accelerated.

If the officer is there and testifies you spun your tires, then you can explain why it’s not possible.

If you talk to the DA you have a better chance of reducing the charge. If he offers guilty to equipment violation, take it. Or anything that is less points, and draws less attention from the insurance companies.
They want the court costs.

What is the speed limit? Were there other cars behind you? If they used radar (which I doubt otherwise he would have given you a speeding ticket,) it would clock the fastest moving vehicle, such as one behind you who is speeding.
If you admit to one mile over the limit you are admitting you were speeding.
So it must have been one those guys behind you.

as it wasn't you.

Pugilist · #5 10-27-2006, 03:04 AM

Do a discovery. Now.

Pug

You Are Guilty · #6 10-27-2006, 10:13 AM

"Spinning tires" and "throwing sand" is not the exclusive list of what constitutes "unreasonable acceleration". They are merely the two examples which, if present, shift the burden of proof onto the defendant. The burden of proof of any other activities which the prosecutor/police say amount to unreasonable accel will remain with the prosecutor.

You guys gotta pay attention when reading those statutes!

jiggageorge · #7 10-27-2006, 02:41 PM

Thanks for all of the good advice. I just find it odd that the officer told me he pulled me over for speeding but he gave me a ticket for "unreasonable acceleration". In addition, the ticket has a comments section and he made no comments about what he witnessed that indicated I accelerated unreasonably.

Here's another catch, the officers were appx. 2 1/2 city blocks down from the intersection which I was stopped at; this seems to me to be to be a long distance to determine if I had accelerated at a fast rate.

I'll be the first person to admit when I did something wrong and will take responsibility for it but to receive a citation for something I feel I was not warranted, I have a hard time swallowing that.