• 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.

California 21453(A) Red Light Infraction 5 MPH

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

pamplets

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

21453(a) Red Light Infraction
Speed: 5 mph
Comments (Weather/Road/Traffic conditions): CDM-H
Palo Alto, CA

The surroundings:
This was a few weeks after I moved to CA and unfamiliar with how the streets and traffic lights were laid out. I'm used to almost all left turns yielding on a green light and few protected left turns. There was also lots of construction on this school campus area so I couldn't take the route that my map told me to take. Normally in intersections there are overhead traffic lights in addition to traffic lights in the corner, but this intersection only had 3 traffic lights, located at each corner. The intersection seemed too large to only have 3 lights. Example:

.| |.
== ==
_| |.
_me

The periods are where the lights are located and the straight lines are the intersection. Underscores are used for spaces. There weren't any overhead lights and I had never seen that before. I contacted the traffic for the city and filed a petition that hasn't been resolved yet. A traffic engineer told me that only 3 lights is ok here because the roads aren't very wide and not too much traffic.


The event:
I was driving through the city because I was lost and I spent a while looking for a road sign to figure out where I was. There was moderate traffic because of some event, but it was not too full when I was driving through. I dont remember seeing any oncoming traffic, so I did my left turn at 5 mph. On my side of the road there were cars that were going straight still so there was a green light on my side. The left turn was red according to the officer. I did not notice the left turn light in the upper left corner. It was very sunny (not used to the CA sun) and I had my sunglasses on and perhaps the trees and traffic light blended into each other. A few seconds after doing the left turn, I was pulled over. I had no idea what happened so I asked the officer if I was speeding or did an illegal turn or something. I was doing the turn at 5 mph because I looked around for any traffic and I didn't see any moving traffic so I thought that the traffic on the left and right (east and west) of me had stop lights and were waiting for me. I would consider myself a safe and slow driver. I had people in the car so I would not have ran a stop light on purpose. I got my license at 16 and I've been driving for 8 years and I had never gotten pulled over, but a few weeks moving to CA I got an expensive ticket for ~$450. I realize that this could've been very dangerous had there been lots of moving traffic. This is about 1.3 weeks of work back at home.


Financial situation :
Took an engineering job here in July
Came from MS where our incomes are far lower than here
$30k in student loans
No bank or credit cards until I came here
Rent is high in CA
I was offered traffic school, but that means I have to pay the entire fine without any price reduction?
My deadline after my 30 day extension is right after New Years
If I decide to pay I'll try to take a loan out, but I don't have good credit due to my lack of credit cards and school loans so I fear even higher interest rates. Would a court have a better interest rate? I was planning on visiting home but I might end up staying here for this first holiday so that should free up money.


I would rather be safe than sorry and opt for traffic school to keep my driving record clean and not try to do any trial and risk an insurance hike. The ticket has been keeping me up a few times this month and I keep panicing about my finances. Is my best alternative to ask for the judge to reduce the fine and do traffic school? Doing traffic school generally means I have to pay the full amount? Did anything I say give me a chance of getting the ticket thrown out? The three lights thing was the minimum set by the traffic engineers and I requested a survey so that they look into it but no response after a month. Also, I think I was cited for a red round light, while there is a red arrow if you look on the second image.

Pictures:
http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/2696/intersection.png
http://img32.imageshack.us/img32/2633/intersection2.png
 
Last edited:


HighwayMan

Super Secret Senior Member
I hope you realize that most of what you posted is irrelevant. If you go to court I hope you leave out most of the saga.

Based on your photos, I fail to see how the intersection in question is confusing or how you could not have seen the lights.

It's hard to see detail about the lights themselves from your pictures. I can't say whether it's an arrow or disk in those pictures. Just because it is an arrow doesn't mean that you can't be faced with a red disk at some point.
 

cheliebely

Junior Member
I thought my states fines were high! You can probably call whatever California's equivalent to the County Court Clerks Office is and ask for a payment arrangement.
 

pamplets

Junior Member
Are you using these pictures as examples of what the intersection/lights look like or are these actual pictures of the intersection in question?

To me.... They look like two different intersections!!!
I guess I would need to confirm but according to googlemaps they are the same. I just press the forward and backward button once and those are the pictures I get.

I hope you realize that most of what you posted is irrelevant. If you go to court I hope you leave out most of the saga.

Based on your photos, I fail to see how the intersection in question is confusing or how you could not have seen the lights.

It's hard to see detail about the lights themselves from your pictures. I can't say whether it's an arrow or disk in those pictures. Just because it is an arrow doesn't mean that you can't be faced with a red disk at some point.
If it was a red arrow, would it help me if I decide to contest?
 

I_Got_Banned

Senior Member
I guess I would need to confirm but according to googlemaps they are the same. I just press the forward and backward button once and those are the pictures I get.
Oh, I'll save you the trouble of having to "confirm"... Here's how I know they are, in fact, two different intersections.

If you look at this picture: http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/2696/intersection.png and pretend you're driving through the intersection, past the light... the street continues straight through.... Where as in the second picture: http://img32.imageshack.us/img32/2633/intersection2.png and if you were to pretend to drive through the intersection, past the light, the street curves to the right...

Also, look at all the trees in the center of the picture...

Lastly, there is NO painted crosswalk on the west side of the intersection in the first picture whereas, there is a painted crosswalk in the second picture.
 

I_Got_Banned

Senior Member
If it was a red arrow, would it help me if I decide to contest?
Yes, if there IS a red arrow at that intersection, then you can argue that you were cited for the wrong CVC section. However, I expect that the officer may testify that there is a circular red rather than a red arrow. Afterwhich, the burden would be placed on you to discredit his testinmony by either presenting a copy of the engineering report for that intersection (<-- preferred method) or by showing an ACTUAL picture of the light itself.

By hte way, for a red circular light, CVC 21453(a) would apply. For a Red Arrow, CVC 21453(c) would apply. You can read both subsections here: V.C. Section 21453 - Circular Red or Red Arrow
 

pamplets

Junior Member
Oh, I'll save you the trouble of having to "confirm"... Here's how I know they are, in fact, two different intersections.

If you look at this picture: http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/2696/intersection.png and pretend you're driving through the intersection, past the light... the street continues straight through.... Where as in the second picture: http://img32.imageshack.us/img32/2633/intersection2.png and if you were to pretend to drive through the intersection, past the light, the street curves to the right...

Also, look at all the trees in the center of the picture...

Lastly, there is NO painted crosswalk on the west side of the intersection in the first picture whereas, there is a painted crosswalk in the second picture.
You're completely correct. Sorry the image with the red light was supposed to be this picture:
http://img519.imageshack.us/img519/9076/intersection42.png
That red light image was another direction that had a red arrow. This yellow light is definitely an arrow, so isn't the red light most likely a red arrow?
 
Last edited:

pamplets

Junior Member
No, not necessarily. Why don't you just go back to the intersection and look??
If it ends up being a red arrow, I'd be able to get my case dismissed right? I'll stop by the intersection on Monday to make sure though.

My plan: My citation deadline (after my 30 day extension) 1/3/09. So I'll try to get an extension and if not then I'll file my TBD via certified mail within 10 days of the deadline. If I lose the TBD I'll do a discovery and prepare a case. I'll try to schedule the trial as close to the 45 days as possible and not waive time or should I do it sooner so the officer has less time to prepare? I'll try to pick a court and time of day that is when the officer is not on duty but how do I know when he is on duty? In the trial I'll simply show a pic of the intersection and the red arrow light. If the citation gets amended will I be able to exercise my traffic school option? This amended citation still falls within the original 45 days for a trial, so there won't be enough time to satisfy a speedy trial and I can likely get the citation dropped in that way as well?
 
Last edited:

pamplets

Junior Member
Ok so I went back to the intersection
Here is the picture with directions notated:
http://img692.imageshack.us/img692/650/cam3lightsedit.jpg

So I was cited for going WEST on a ROUND red light

In reality, I went SOUTH on an ARROW light.

The picture shows both a round and an arrow. Would this picture be enough to justify this and win a TBD? I have no idea how I can prove this though. I was stopped after I took the left turn. In addition, while I was there for the 15 min or so, a policeman stopped a guy going west on the round, so it is a known trap.
 
Last edited:

I_Got_Banned

Senior Member
Ok so I went back to the intersection
Here is the picture with directions notated:
http://img692.imageshack.us/img692/650/cam3lightsedit.jpg

So I was cited for going WEST on a ROUND red light

In reality, I went SOUTH on an ARROW light.

The picture shows both a round and an arrow. Would this picture be enough to justify this and win a TBD?
Two problems that you have with that picture:
First, the only thing that the picture shows is an intersection, traffic lights... etc. There are no street signs (street names) identifying which street is which or one direction from another; only YOUR arrows and notations.... I am not saying you are making things up; all I am saying is that picture, as it stands, lack the proper foundation to establish that it is in fact the intersection where you were cited. (AGAIN, get the engineering survey for that intrsectionand use that as evidence...).

Second, and even if you get lucky to have the judge accept it as being the same intersection, and based on what you posted, you're stating that you were facing west against a red arrow and turned south afterwards, all while the officer will testify that you were facing north against a circular red and turned west afterwards. Take a wild guess as to who's version the judge is going to believe!!!

I can't even begin to think how you're going to get yourself out of that one.

In addition, while I was there for the 15 min or so, a policeman stopped a guy going west on the round, so it is a known trap.
Yeah, but you are saying that you were going south on a red arrow, so it sounds to me like your so called "trap" was in a different direction as the "trap" that the other guy was stopped for.
 

pamplets

Junior Member
Two problems that you have with that picture:
First, the only thing that the picture shows is an intersection, traffic lights... etc. There are no street signs (street names) identifying which street is which or one direction from another; only YOUR arrows and notations.... I am not saying you are making things up; all I am saying is that picture, as it stands, lack the proper foundation to establish that it is in fact the intersection where you were cited. (AGAIN, get the engineering survey for that intrsectionand use that as evidence...).

Second, and even if you get lucky to have the judge accept it as being the same intersection, and based on what you posted, you're stating that you were facing west against a red arrow and turned south afterwards, all while the officer will testify that you were facing north against a circular red and turned west afterwards. Take a wild guess as to who's version the judge is going to believe!!!

I can't even begin to think how you're going to get yourself out of that one.


Yeah, but you are saying that you were going south on a red arrow, so it sounds to me like your so called "trap" was in a different direction as the "trap" that the other guy was stopped for.
I do have a picture with the street signs and both traffic lights but you can't read the street name. I also have a picture of readable street signs but only one light is shown.

Yes, it seems like I won't be able to use a defense based on the arrow. I mentioned it as a trap because it seems that this is an intersection, not just one direction, with frequent moving violations and traffic engineers may find that this intersection will need adjustment.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

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