Want to "interview" the officer

[YellowLight]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? California

A police officer cited me for a red light (CVC21453(c)) and I believe that the light was really yellow. If I want to ask the officer questions [in writing] before the trial or trial by declaration, how am I supposed to do that? Am I supposed to file for Discovery with the DA to get the officer's mailing address and mail him the questions? If they refuse to give it to me, is this grounds for dismissal?

 

[Zigner]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? California

A police officer cited me for a red light (CVC21453(c)) and I believe that the light was really yellow. If I want to ask the officer questions [in writing] before the trial or trial by declaration, how am I supposed to do that? Am I supposed to file for Discovery with the DA to get the officer's mailing address and mail him the questions? If they refuse to give it to me, is this grounds for dismissal?

You don't get to do that...

 

[YellowLight]

You don't get to do that...

Hmm, I thought the officer is a witness, right? Are you saying that I don't get to question a witness before trial?

 

[Isis1]

Hmm, I thought the officer is a witness, right? Are you saying that I don't get to question a witness before trial?

you would question the witness during the trial or a deposition. you will not be given the officer's home address.

 

[cyjeff]

Nope... not before trial.

Asking questions and getting answers is kinda what a trial is.

 

[cyjeff]

For a depostition, you would need an attorney... and for a traffic offense, you are talking some major cash outlay.

Further, there is NO, repeat NO, compelling reason for the officer to answer any question you pose outside of a courtroom or in a deposition hearing.

And I have never heard of a deposition hearing for a red light ticket.

 

[Isis1]

For a depostition, you would need an attorney... and for a traffic offense, you are talking some major cash outlay.

Further, there is NO, repeat NO, compelling reason for the officer to answer any question you pose outside of a courtroom or in a deposition hearing.

And I have never heard of a deposition hearing for a red light ticket.

neither have i. i just know that's the ONLY other time questioning occurs.

 

[cyjeff]

neither have i. i just know that's the ONLY other time questioning occurs.

You are correct... but there has to be a compelling reason for the deposition... and it is usually to AVOID the court proceedings in a civil case to come to a settlement.

I don't think a traffic offense warrants the use of a DA's time here... especially when that DA isn't even involved in the traffic court itself.

 

[YellowLight]

Thanks for your helpful responses, guys. I guess if the officer shows up, I'll have to choose between either "no contest and traffic school" or "question the officer and risk a point on DMV record."

Just wondering, do you guys know any good questions to ask during trial? I was told by the police department, the court, and the DA that the officer didn't write any notes down.

 

[CdwJava]

Here is the section for which you were cited:

21453(c) A driver facing a steady red arrow signal shall not enter the
intersection to make the movement indicated by the arrow and, unless
entering the intersection to make a movement permitted by another
signal, shall stop at a clearly marked limit line, but if none,
before entering the crosswalk on the near side of the intersection,
or if none, then before entering the intersection, and shall remain
stopped until an indication permitting movement is shown.​

Good questions might be those that show what the officer's vantage point was, and asking about what he saw and how. If he was behind you somewhere, he probably had a good vantage point of the red arrow. If he was off to the side or across the way, he likely had a good view of YOU,but no good view of the arrow. If he guessed that the arrow was red, he would need to articulate how he knows it was, and that could be a hole in the case.

 

[YellowLight]

Here is the section for which you were cited:

21453(c) A driver facing a steady red arrow signal shall not enter the
intersection to make the movement indicated by the arrow and, unless
entering the intersection to make a movement permitted by another
signal, shall stop at a clearly marked limit line, but if none,
before entering the crosswalk on the near side of the intersection,
or if none, then before entering the intersection, and shall remain
stopped until an indication permitting movement is shown.​

Good questions might be those that show what the officer's vantage point was, and asking about what he saw and how. If he was behind you somewhere, he probably had a good vantage point of the red arrow. If he was off to the side or across the way, he likely had a good view of YOU,but no good view of the arrow. If he guessed that the arrow was red, he would need to articulate how he knows it was, and that could be a hole in the case.

I think he was behind me, but I really don't know. Anyway, assuming that he was, do you suggest that I argue that he would not have been able to see that my front bumper had already passed the crosswalk line?

 

[CdwJava]

I think he was behind me, but I really don't know. Anyway, assuming that he was, do you suggest that I argue that he would not have been able to see that my front bumper had already passed the crosswalk line?

It might be one avenue. But, if he articulates that your car never stopped rolling at all, or that it stopped and then went through even as the red arrow was active, your not going to stand much of a chance.

 

[YellowLight]

It might be one avenue. But, if he articulates that your car never stopped rolling at all, or that it stopped and then went through even as the red arrow was active, your not going to stand much of a chance.

Are you thinking of a right turn on red thing? This ticket is about a normal left turn that I believe I made while the light was still yellow but the officer thought it was red. I didn't stop or slow down before determining that I would still be able to legally make it.