NYS 1163A Violation--Confused

[coreynyc]

Occurred in NYC (NY State)
Flushing Queens
Making left from Main St (South Bound) onto Horace Harding Expressway (East Bound)

Long line of traffic in dedicated left turn lane with little movement for several minutes/traffic light cycles. I move to "regular" left lane and make left turn from there. There was no sign or marking in this lane indicating I could/could not make the left.

I am not claiming ignorance in fighting the ticket but I am only now aware this was an illegal turn/maneuver. I thought you were allowed to make a turn like this if the road you are turning on to had multiple lanes (in other words, left turn lane turns into left lane, next lane over can turn into right lane) and no sign preventing the turn.

Cops were clearly sitting at intersection, waiting for this.

I passed the intersection 10 minutes earlier on my way to a gas station and they had someone else pulled over. It seems like they lie in wait for people like myself to make this turn because the intersection's lights appear to be poorly timed, causing the backup.

Typical governmental BS: rather than fix a problem, give the public violations and create revenue. But I digress...

So, I received a 1163a violation, which through some Googling this morning, seems to normally given to people who failed to signal. I did signal and the officer's comments on the ticket only say "Improper Turn".

As I am not a lawyer, I find the wording of 1163a to be somewhat vague in regards to whether it applies here and not sure why it normally applies to signal tickets.

"No person shall turn a vehicle at an intersection unless the vehicle is in proper position upon the roadway as required in section eleven hundred sixty"

"Proper position" is what I find to be vague.

The ticket itself is written by a cop who has poor handwriting. I know technicalities are unlikely to have the ticket thrown out in NYC but the make of the vehicle (Honda) is completely illegible. Several written numbers and numbers look they they can be more than one number/letter or something else entirely and even his name is confusingly written. I remember it to be "Vega" and at best, it looks like "Vela".

Perhaps the technicality with the most potential is that the officer simply wrote "N/S" for the registration expiration date. My car is new (less than 2 weeks old) and I have a NYS temporary registration sticker. I have to look at my temporary registration later but I assume it should have some sort of expiration date.

I know this is a violation that can have impact on insurance rates and recently had a claim. My insurance hasn't been jacked up yet but I assume it will be during the next renewal.

Is there anything I've stated that gives me hope to fight it or should I suck it up and go the attorney route?

 

[Zigner]

As I am not a lawyer, I find the wording of 1163a to be somewhat vague in regards to whether it applies here and not sure why it normally applies to signal tickets.

It's not vague. It refers you over to section 1160. Read 1160 and you'll see that your supposed to start your turn from the far left unless otherwise marked. You didn't do so.

Frankly, I'm astonished that you learned differently, and I think you really should go to a traffic safety course for a refresher on how to drive.

 

[coreynyc]

Thanks for the lecture.

If someone has any insight in regards to my violation and he potential for fighting it, it would be extremely appreciated.

As previously stated, this seems to be a violation normally given to signal violations.

 

[Zigner]

Thanks for the lecture.

If someone has any insight in regards to my violation and he potential for fighting it, it would be extremely appreciated.

As previously stated, this seems to be a violation normally given to signal violations.

No, it's given when you don't turn properly.

 

[HighwayMan]

All of your points about how the summons was written will not count for anything. Your registration expiration date is irrelevant to the violation so the fact that it is noted as "not shown" will also get you no break.

From the sounds of it you made an improper turn. I would have written you for 1160 (the subsection eludes me at the moment) and 1163 (a) is what I write for failing to signal a turn. However, the statute is clear and DOES refer to vehicle positioning. The officer may be inexperienced and actually did you a favor since what you got written for is more, well, generic than the improper turn.

Remember - left turns must ALWAYS be made from the left lane or left-most portion of the roadway. Period. If there is no signage or pavement markings which expressly permit the turn then turning from any other lane is prohibited.

In addition, the "everyone does it" defense will also get you nowhere. You can argue until you're blue in the face about it - the bottom line is that the traffic issues at that intersection are irrelevant to YOU committing a traffic infraction.

I know that intersection and have never had problems there. As long as drivers obey the law and don't obstruct any intersections traffic flow should be normal. Oh, and I've grown weary of the old "revenue generation" argument. The City of New York gets very little, if any, revenue from your particular fine. The Department of Transportation couldn't care less about ticket revenue - this is not some mass conspiracy.

So plead "not guilty" and take your chances in the Traffic Violations Bureau. It sounds to me as if you stand a good chance of winning - not because you have a defense or justification, but because the officer may very likely not testify to all of the required elements of the offense.

 

[coreynyc]

All of your points about how the summons was written will not count for anything. Your registration expiration date is irrelevant to the violation so the fact that it is noted as "not shown" will also get you no break.

From the sounds of it you made an improper turn. I would have written you for 1160 (the subsection eludes me at the moment) and 1163 (a) is what I write for failing to signal a turn. However, the statute is clear and DOES refer to vehicle positioning. The officer may be inexperienced and actually did you a favor since what you got written for is more, well, generic than the improper turn.

Remember - left turns must ALWAYS be made from the left lane or left-most portion of the roadway. Period. If there is no signage or pavement markings which expressly permit the turn then turning from any other lane is prohibited.

In addition, the "everyone does it" defense will also get you nowhere. You can argue until you're blue in the face about it - the bottom line is that the traffic issues at that intersection are irrelevant to YOU committing a traffic infraction.

I know that intersection and have never had problems there. As long as drivers obey the law and don't obstruct any intersections traffic flow should be normal. Oh, and I've grown weary of the old "revenue generation" argument. The City of New York gets very little, if any, revenue from your particular fine. The Department of Transportation couldn't care less about ticket revenue - this is not some mass conspiracy.

So plead "not guilty" and take your chances in the Traffic Violations Bureau. It sounds to me as if you stand a good chance of winning - not because you have a defense or justification, but because the officer may very likely not testify to all of the required elements of the offense.

Highwayman,

Thanks for the response.

I believe the officer's negligence in not supplying the date COULD lead to dismissal because it then brings into question the officer's entire testimony of what happened (prima facie). Not saying its likely, but it is possible.

If that doesn't happen, can you please elaborate on what the "required elements of the offense" you referred to and how I can use that to my advantage?

In regards to the revenue generating comment, it seemed that the cops were sitting there picking people off for this left turn. So maybe I was wrong about the revenue generating portion but it does seem like there is a known problem at that intersection. Otherwise, the cops would be doing something else.

Regardlesss, thanks for the info and I hope you can provide a little more info.

 

[Ladyback1]

In regards to the revenue generating comment, it seemed that the cops were sitting there picking people off for this left turn. So maybe I was wrong about the revenue generating portion but it does seem like there is a known problem at that intersection. Otherwise, the cops would be doing something else.

Regardlesss, thanks for the info and I hope you can provide a little more info.

Do you realize that there are indeed, TRAFFIC COPS. TRAFFIC is what those cops are assigned to for their patrol/shift.
So, unfortunately for you, the officer was doing his job.

 

[FlyingRon]

Do you realize that there are indeed, TRAFFIC COPS. TRAFFIC is what those cops are assigned to for their patrol/shift.
So, unfortunately for you, the officer was doing his job.

Specifically there are 2800 specific traffic enforcement agents/supervisors.

 

[not2cleverRed]

Highwayman,

Thanks for the response.

I believe the officer's negligence in not supplying the date COULD lead to dismissal because it then brings into question the officer's entire testimony of what happened (prima facie). Not saying its likely, but it is possible.

If that doesn't happen, can you please elaborate on what the "required elements of the offense" you referred to and how I can use that to my advantage?

In regards to the revenue generating comment, it seemed that the cops were sitting there picking people off for this left turn. So maybe I was wrong about the revenue generating portion but it does seem like there is a known problem at that intersection. Otherwise, the cops would be doing something else.

Regardlesss, thanks for the info and I hope you can provide a little more info.

Perhaps they are stationed there because that type of turn is illegal and there are violations enough occurring there to warrant it.

It might even convince some people to modify their behavior.

 

[HighwayMan]

Specifically there are 2800 specific traffic enforcement agents/supervisors.

Most cannot write traffic tickets, FYI.

 

[HighwayMan]

I believe the officer's negligence in not supplying the date COULD lead to dismissal because it then brings into question the officer's entire testimony of what happened ...

I have testified in every TVB office in the City of New York except for Manhattan North. I know of no administrative law judge who would dismiss your ticket (in this case) because your registration expiration date was not noted. It is not negligence - an error perhaps but not negligence. Making one insignificant error on a traffic ticket does not void the ticket.

If that doesn't happen, can you please elaborate on what the "required elements of the offense" you referred to and how I can use that to my advantage?

You can't use it because you have zero experience representing yourself in TVB. The burden of proof is on the officer who must provide all elements of the offense on direct testimony. There is no way I can sit here and coach you on everything the officer has to cover. Suffice it to say that if the officer does not cover these elements then the judge should find you not guilty.

In regards to the revenue generating comment, it seemed that the cops were sitting there picking people off for this left turn. So maybe I was wrong about the revenue generating portion but it does seem like there is a known problem at that intersection. Otherwise, the cops would be doing something else.

Well, maybe they saw a condition and decided to address it. You don't know (probably) whether they were precinct officers or perhaps part of a borough task force who might not even be familiar with that area.

If I am driving down the road and see a lot of people doing the same illegal thing I'll stop and do enforcement there. Example: when the New England Thruway (I-95) starts to backup going northbound traffic gets backed up on the eastbound Bruckner Expressway. I've seen it many times. So what happens? Motorists see the brake lights ahead of them and stop and begin to backup on the Bruckner so that they can go back to get off at the Hutch. So I'll stop just at the exit and wait for these people to come to me and then write them for backing on a controlled access highway. Is this revenue generation? Well sure, but who cares? I certainly don't. I saw a condition and I'm addressing it. Others will see me with cars pulled over and not do the same dangerous thing.

No officer out there in NYC cares about generating revenue - it is a non-issue. And as I said, very little, if any, of that money goes to the city anyway.

 

[HighwayMan]

One thing I can say with a reasonable degree of certainty - if the issuing officer is experienced at testifying in the TVB then you stand little chance, with or without an attorney.

I get the feeling, based upon the charge, that maybe the officer is not that experienced doing traffic enforcement and testifying. If THAT is the case then you can win by just remaining silent at your hearing.

 

[coreynyc]

It was a local (107) precinct officer.

Look I get I was in the wrong but you will not convince me that there isn't a known problem of traffic backing up in the left turn lane there and people making the left from the regular lane of traffic and that the officers weren't just randomly there.

The DOT seems to be lax in addressing problem intersections. I can think of several in my neighborhood that are begging to be fixed.

There's a major one (Yellowstone & Queens) that they decided to "fix" by preventing people from making a left off Yellowstone in 1 direction and thus needlessly sending cars into a residential neighborhood and directly towards another clogged intersection 1 block away. The cars then end up on the service road of Queens Blvd rather than the main road.

Anyway, I have a traffic attorney now on the case. He's in the same office as my wife's uncle. So I won't be entering the hearing room.

 

[HighwayMan]

Anyway, I have a traffic attorney now on the case. He's in the same office as my wife's uncle. So I won't be entering the hearing room.

If that attorney is not experienced in the TVB environment then you are wasting your money.

 

[Bali Hai]

Perhaps they are stationed there because that type of turn is illegal and there are violations enough occurring there to warrant it.

It might even convince some people to modify their behavior.

I was parked in a metered parking spot along 8th ave. and walked to an apt. on 23rd st. I went down to feed the meter a few minutes before it expired. As I approached my car, I saw an officer slap a parking ticket on my car. I was within seconds of reaching the meter that had just expired. Were the parking cops watching my meter because they knew it was about to expire? Yes. Was I legally given a parking ticket? Yes. Did they do this to generate revenue for the city? Yes. Did they do this to modify my behavior. No.

http://money.cnn.com/2015/01/06/news/economy/nypd-tickets/