• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Should I fight a 21453 traffic violation?

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

loe_in_626

Junior Member
I will read

After re-reading this, I can see you have a basic misunderstanding of what it means to "yield". Please research the term in several places. You will find that, if your movement interferes with other drivers, you have not yielded.

I shouldn't be arguing this with you, If i don't fully understand that yielding clearly defines, but there is nothing unsafe with making a turn onto a lane where there is no traffic. It shouldn't be my fault that somebody made a lane change after I made the turn.


Anyways, I will go read the definition right now
 


Zigner

Senior Member, Non-Attorney
...but there is nothing unsafe with making a turn onto a lane where there is no traffic.
There IS oncoming traffic. Let's say it's a 3-lane road in the direction you want to turn. There is an oncoming car in the left lane and the middle lane. Do you think it's legal to make a turn in to the right hand lane? If you answer in the affirmative, you are wrong.
 

loe_in_626

Junior Member
Thx

That's a bummer, I did not know that. I always used to get aggravated with drivers who wouldn't make the right turn in front of me even if the right lane was free, but I guess I was always wrong about that. UGGH, that's disappointing. I love to drive, I am a very defensive driver, so it bugs me when I'm wrong about laws like this.

Final thx to you and your time!
 

JIMinCA

Member
There IS oncoming traffic. Let's say it's a 3-lane road in the direction you want to turn. There is an oncoming car in the left lane and the middle lane. Do you think it's legal to make a turn in to the right hand lane? If you answer in the affirmative, you are wrong.
Geez.... lay off! You have been beating this guy up in post after post. You are relentless about telling OPs that they are wrong.... but you never do anything to actually help them with a defense.

3 links. That's the challenge.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Isis1

Senior Member
Geez.... lay off! You have been beating this guy up in post after post. You are relentless about telling OPs that they are wrong.... but you never do anything to actually help them with a defense.

3 links. That's the challenge.
you know, the OP didn't take it poorly.

OP, congrats on being willing to learn and understand. if it makes you feel any better, i didn't know about the whole "all three lanes, only the right one not being driven on is still not yielding" issue. geez. i'm glad i found out. saved me a ticket! :eek:
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Zigner

Senior Member, Non-Attorney
Geez.... lay off! You have been beating this guy up in post after post. You are relentless about telling OPs that they are wrong.... but you never do anything to actually help them with a defense.

3 links. That's the challenge.
Actually, pointing out an invalid defense is just as (if not more) helpful than giving false hope. I suggested traffic school. Are you saying that's not a valid option?
 

WaltinPA

Member
My own past experience supports Zigner's suggestion to take the traffic school alternative.

I got a speeding ticket in Texas over 20 years ago. Took a traffic cases-only lawyer with me to court. We listened to the guy ahead plead his case for the same offense in the same area on the same highway where I had been nabbed. After 30-40 minutes of the defendant being his own lawyer, the magistrate pronounced verdit: Guilty; pay fine & court costs.

My lawyer negotiated for me to attend the traffic school which cost time & money on top of the lawyer's fees. My coworker had called me a dummy for my efforts but I got off with no points and no increase in my vehicle insurance which I considered a win-win for me.

Just a voice of experience here.
 

loe_in_626

Junior Member
you know, the OP didn't take it poorly.

OP, congrats on being willing to learn and understand. if it makes you feel any better, i didn't know about the whole "all three lanes, only the right one not being driven on is still not yielding" issue. geez. i'm glad i found out. saved me a ticket! :eek:
;) And I'm glad somebody understands this traffic law is kinda BS, the fault should go to the one who committed the unsafe move, and I'd like to point out that making a right turn onto a lane where there is no traffic is perfectly safe.However, making a lane change without signaling in the middle of an intersection when there is traffic yielding to enter the road, is SO dangerous.
 

Zigner

Senior Member, Non-Attorney
;) And I'm glad somebody understands this traffic law is kinda BS, the fault should go to the one who committed the unsafe move, and I'd like to point out that making a right turn onto a lane where there is no traffic is perfectly safe.However, making a lane change without signaling in the middle of an intersection when there is traffic yielding to enter the road, is SO dangerous.
Your problem is that you have NO CLUE where the other car was because you didn't see it before entering the intersection...
 

timbo59

Junior Member
Fight it

As you seem fairly trenchant in your observations that you may be in the right, I would suggest that you simply fight the ticket.

As already stated, the repercussions may make the situation worse rather than better vis-a-vis traffic school (I'm not sure what the situation is in your home state) but the simple fact is that by merely turning up you may get off based on the fact that the booking officer may not show! Personally I always advocate to everyone that they should automatically fight tickets if there's a sound basis for arguing that it was handed out incorrectly, because cops are only human, they do make mistakes, and some get way too carried away with their authority on the road and nab people on the flimsiest excuse.

I've lived in the USA for 10 years and have been ticketed twice. Both occasions I fought the ticket, both occasions I won. The first occasion was when I got booked for supposedly 'running' a red light (one of my personal pet hates after observing driving habits in this country for a decade) in a situation when I was driving a well loaded van in torrential Florida weather, got caught in no-man's land at an intersection trying to decide whether to stop at a yellow or not, and decided with the load I had on and the prevailing conditions that I stood a chance of losing control if I braked hard - so I went through. The light didn't change to red until I was half way through the intersection, yet I still got the ticket. I later explained the situation to the judge, cited my 25 year exemplary driving record, pointed out that the officer was sitting parked in a Walgreens' lot on the other side of the intersection in driving rain and couldn't have had a clear picture of the scene - end result, I got off. Had I simply accepted the 'inevitable', as most people do, I would have been hit with a hefty fine and had a nasty blot on my record.

The second time around I received a ticket for supposedly changing lanes in such a way that I impeded another car's progress. It was a crap ticket handed out by a hot-headed novice cop who didn't know his own rule book - I was accelerating away from the vehicle in question when I changed lanes, which is what I always do in tight situations - I don't like being forced to brake, I extend the same courtesy to others. The cop later lied in court by claiming he was directly behind me (IE parallel with the vehicle I impeded) as I switched lanes, thus claiming a close up view of the 'hazardous' manner with which I switched lanes. But he also claimed that I forced the car into braking hard, a fact he emphasized by stating that he saw the car's brake lights light up as I switched lanes. As I pointed out to the judge, how could he have been parallel to the car, yet seen it's brake lights come on? Turned out though that my argument was a moot point - the judge verified something else that I thought had seemed dubious - I'd been booked with a highway violation while driving on a state road, and on that basis he threw the ticket out.

I would also point out that my sister-in-law, who happens to be a cop, told me that half the time police officers can't be bothered to turn up in court on a given day either because they're too busy elsewhere or are simply having a day off and don't want to take away from their leisure time. You may thus find that you stand a 50/50 chance of getting a break even without having to argue your case.

I don't advocate that anyone simply fight a ticket just because they can - I firmly believe in the old adage 'if you do the crime, do the time'. But I also firmly believe that far too many people simply accept tickets as a done deal, when in actual fact they stand an excellent chance of having matters overturned simply by showing up.
 

Zigner

Senior Member, Non-Attorney
Court's overtime in our neck of the woods. All the officers I've spoken to LOVE court...it's easy money ;)

It is silly to suggest that a person "fight" a ticket based solely on the hope that the officer will not show up. The attendance rate is much higher than 50% ;)


As you seem fairly trenchant in your observations that you may be in the right, I would suggest that you simply fight the ticket.

As already stated, the repercussions may make the situation worse rather than better vis-a-vis traffic school (I'm not sure what the situation is in your home state) but the simple fact is that by merely turning up you may get off based on the fact that the booking officer may not show! Personally I always advocate to everyone that they should automatically fight tickets if there's a sound basis for arguing that it was handed out incorrectly, because cops are only human, they do make mistakes, and some get way too carried away with their authority on the road and nab people on the flimsiest excuse.

I've lived in the USA for 10 years and have been ticketed twice. Both occasions I fought the ticket, both occasions I won. The first occasion was when I got booked for supposedly 'running' a red light (one of my personal pet hates after observing driving habits in this country for a decade) in a situation when I was driving a well loaded van in torrential Florida weather, got caught in no-man's land at an intersection trying to decide whether to stop at a yellow or not, and decided with the load I had on and the prevailing conditions that I stood a chance of losing control if I braked hard - so I went through. The light didn't change to red until I was half way through the intersection, yet I still got the ticket. I later explained the situation to the judge, cited my 25 year exemplary driving record, pointed out that the officer was sitting parked in a Walgreens' lot on the other side of the intersection in driving rain and couldn't have had a clear picture of the scene - end result, I got off. Had I simply accepted the 'inevitable', as most people do, I would have been hit with a hefty fine and had a nasty blot on my record.

The second time around I received a ticket for supposedly changing lanes in such a way that I impeded another car's progress. It was a crap ticket handed out by a hot-headed novice cop who didn't know his own rule book - I was accelerating away from the vehicle in question when I changed lanes, which is what I always do in tight situations - I don't like being forced to brake, I extend the same courtesy to others. The cop later lied in court by claiming he was directly behind me (IE parallel with the vehicle I impeded) as I switched lanes, thus claiming a close up view of the 'hazardous' manner with which I switched lanes. But he also claimed that I forced the car into braking hard, a fact he emphasized by stating that he saw the car's brake lights light up as I switched lanes. As I pointed out to the judge, how could he have been parallel to the car, yet seen it's brake lights come on? Turned out though that my argument was a moot point - the judge verified something else that I thought had seemed dubious - I'd been booked with a highway violation while driving on a state road, and on that basis he threw the ticket out.

I would also point out that my sister-in-law, who happens to be a cop, told me that half the time police officers can't be bothered to turn up in court on a given day either because they're too busy elsewhere or are simply having a day off and don't want to take away from their leisure time. You may thus find that you stand a 50/50 chance of getting a break even without having to argue your case.

I don't advocate that anyone simply fight a ticket just because they can - I firmly believe in the old adage 'if you do the crime, do the time'. But I also firmly believe that far too many people simply accept tickets as a done deal, when in actual fact they stand an excellent chance of having matters overturned simply by showing up.
 

loe_in_626

Junior Member
Your problem is that you have NO CLUE where the other car was because you didn't see it before entering the intersection...
Well I can do some simple math...or have simple problem solving skills. If I know it wasn't the car that was in the right lane far off in the distance. Then it had to been the car in the left lane crossing the intersection.

And that's funny you say that, because I went to take pictures of where the cop was exactly positioned at, and it shows he had NOOOO view of the intersection.

One more thing....Here is one question I have for the arresting cop. (if he shows up, because I do know that whether cops like going to court or not, attendance is close to 50 percent, I got this number from court experience.)

If a pedestrian who has the right of way but runs across the middle of the road 20 feet in front of me, surely I wouldn’t be to blame for if I hit him right? Now how is that different from my case today?

I say that, because the car who must of changed lanes in the middle of the intersection did NOT use turn signals, which is illegal, just as jaywalking is. and the jaywalker ran across 2 seconds before I reached the location, just like the car changed lanes onto 'MY" right lane, after I did.
 

loe_in_626

Junior Member
Ho do you know he did NOT signal before he changed lanes if in fact you say YOU DIDN'T SEE HIM until he was in the right lane?


It is not YOUR lane if you had a red light!
Correction, I had all the approaching cars in my view, none had turn signals blinking. And the reason I referred the lane as "My" lane, was because I executed the turn safely before he made the lane change, therefore the lane was mine.
 

I_Got_Banned

Senior Member
Correction, I had all the approaching cars in my view, none had turn signals blinking.
Let me rephrase my question then:
How do you know that he didn't signal if you did not see him while he was in the process of changing his lane. Also, and even you can somehow mysteriously establish that he did not signal, i.e. he was in violation of an unsafe lane change, what makes you think that his alleged violation will/should wipe away yours???

Point is, it is not illegal for him to change lanes in the intersection. And by you entering the intersection while he was in it all while your light was RED, you failed to yield to traffic within the intersection in violation of 21453(a).

And the reason I referred the lane as "My" lane, was because I executed the turn safely before he made the lane change, therefore the lane was mine.
Again, read the second paragraph I posted above... It is not your lane if there were other vehicles within the intersection. In fact, if the vehicle was inside the intersection and even if your light changed to green, you are still required to yield to other vehicle within the intersection until the intersection is clear before you can claim any of the lanes within it to be YOURS!

Your light in this case was RED! Which in turn would suggest that the lane was NOT yours!!!
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top