• 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.

12814.6 cvc

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

Status
Not open for further replies.

San*Diego

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

About a month ago i was driving through my empty school parking lot with two other cars, following the other two cars to the exit (going from one side to another). I had two people in my car and the other two cars were full with passengers. A cop who was across the street (not in the school parking lot) somehow caught a glimpse of my car and said i was speeding. This cop was across the street conducting a speed trap for the oncoming traffic to fall into. Being across the street and not in my school parking lot, if he was to see my car, he would have to have looked through trees and shrubbery to even just get a quick glance at my car. The parking lot doesnt have any speed limit signs posted and i know for a fact I was following the other cars not even going 20 mph. After i exited the school parking lot i turned onto the street the cop was conducting a speed trap on (a 45mph zone) going about 40mph and was flagged down by the police officer. While the two cars in front of me didnt get flagged down.

When stopped the officer asked me, "why were you driving like a maniac?" I had just responded, "I dont know officer" not knowing of how i was driving like a maniac. He then followed the regular procedures of getting my license and registration and figured out that I had a provisional license. It was powderpuff week at my school that week, and i was driving my two friends about a mile away from the school to go to our practice, and so were the two other cars in front of me.

When i received my ticket, the police officer said he wasnt charging me with speeding and only for driving with two passengers. it said under description of the infraction, "12814.6(a)(1)(a) driving two passengers; speeding unsafe" and under where it said speed it was left blank. the officer never informed me of what my speed was, and obviously he didnt know himself.

Knowing some useful tips about traffic law, i paid my bail which was $203, and asked to do a trial by mail (better chance of the officer not responding).

I had researched the provisional license laws and here is a little excerpt from the CA DMV website:

(1) Except as specified in paragraph (2), during the first 12 months after issuance of a provisional license the licensee may not do any of the following unless accompanied and supervised by a licensed driver who is the licensee’s parent or guardian, a licensed driver who is 25 years of age or older, or a licensed or certified driving instructor::

(A) Drive between the hours of 11 p.m. and 5 a.m.

(B) Transport passengers who are under 20 years of age.

My questions are:

Being charged for 12814.6 (a)(1)(a), wouldnt i be charged for driving between 11pm and 5 am? The ticket clearly states written at 13:14 at the top of the ticket, meaning 1:14pm. Shouldnt the officer have put (a)(1)(b) instead?

And doesnt the officer need some type of probable cause to pull me over in the first place? He obviously was just saying i was speeding since he didnt have the speed himself.

And being a school activity, is there a chance for a lesser penalty if my plan falls through?

And isnt the penalty $203 a little too much for a first time offense?

Please respond with any help. Thank you.What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?
 


Ohiogal

Queen Bee
You broke the law. He made a typo but you still had passengers and should not have had passengers. Hence he had a right to pull you over based on what you have posted.
 

CdwJava

Senior Member
This cop was across the street conducting a speed trap for the oncoming traffic to fall into.
And you know it was a "speed trap" (which has a very specific legal definition, by the way), because ..... ????

When stopped the officer asked me, "why were you driving like a maniac?" I had just responded, "I dont know officer" not knowing of how i was driving like a maniac.
Here's how:

"i was driving through my empty school parking lot with two other cars, following the other two cars to the exit (going from one side to another). I had two people in my car and the other two cars were full with passengers"
If you were whipping back and forth, we might be able to call that "reckless driving".

He then followed the regular procedures of getting my license and registration and figured out that I had a provisional license.
Oops!

It was powderpuff week at my school that week, and i was driving my two friends about a mile away from the school to go to our practice, and so were the two other cars in front of me.
Hmm ... last time I checked, a provisional license restrictions did not have an exception for passengers based upon distance they were being taken.

it said under description of the infraction, "12814.6(a)(1)(a) driving two passengers; speeding unsafe" and under where it said speed it was left blank. the officer never informed me of what my speed was, and obviously he didnt know himself.
Because your speed was not relevant to the issue of your whacked driving while having passengers in your car while operating on a provisional license.

Knowing some useful tips about traffic law, i paid my bail which was $203, and asked to do a trial by mail (better chance of the officer not responding).
If you say so. :rolleyes: Those are actually easier than making court because the officer fills it out at the office, he doesn't have to do it on his day off after driving two hours from home.

I had researched the provisional license laws and here is a little excerpt from the CA DMV website:

Being charged for 12814.6 (a)(1)(a), wouldnt i be charged for driving between 11pm and 5 am? The ticket clearly states written at 13:14 at the top of the ticket, meaning 1:14pm. Shouldnt the officer have put (a)(1)(b) instead?
He should have just issued you a citation for CVC 12814.6(b) ... there is the off chance that if the cite is not amended, that you can prevail. The (a) section covers PERMIT restrictions and conditions, not PROVISIONAL license restrictions.

Unfortunately for you, the court or the officer will likely amend it to CVC 12814.6 because I do not believe the court delineates the subsections out as a separate offense (at least that is the indication at the back of MY CVC handbook).

And doesnt the officer need some type of probable cause to pull me over in the first place? He obviously was just saying i was speeding since he didnt have the speed himself.
He will likely assert that you were driving in a reckless manner in the parking lot. If you wish to take him to trial and challenge on his observations, go right ahead.

As a side note, you should also understand the simple fact that the 16-19 year old age group has about FIVE TIMES as many serious injury or fatal collisions than any other age category. Kids tend to drive like idiots ... this is why some people are advocating for a higher age to start driving.

And being a school activity, is there a chance for a lesser penalty if my plan falls through?
Why would that have anything to do with it? In fact, the presence o other children and vehicle could lend itself to a reckless driving charge - a misdemeanor that could result in jail time. Your lucky he just hit you for the provisional section - and because he wrote the wrong subsection, you might get luckier still. Heck, another officer might have just cited you and towed your car for up to 30 days as a result of the reckless driving.

And isnt the penalty $203 a little too much for a first time offense?
That's likely the middle road. I'm sure they can go higher. And that total includes fines, fees and assessment, I imagine.

- Carl
 

San*Diego

Junior Member
Hey guess what!

I did my trial by mail and they found me not guilty!
shove that in yo faces

the code didnt match the violation
 

CdwJava

Senior Member
Hey guess what!

I did my trial by mail and they found me not guilty!
shove that in yo faces

the code didnt match the violation
Wait ... didn't I say that?

Hmmm ... so ... shove that in YO face, kid.

Oh, and heed the provisions of your license lest the next cop you front off decide to get it right and maybe find a good reason to tow your car.

Time to grow up and listen to the rules.

- carl
 

San*Diego

Junior Member
Unfortunately for you, the court or the officer will likely amend it to CVC 12814.6 because I do not believe the court delineates the subsections out as a separate offense (at least that is the indication at the back of MY CVC handbook).
nukka
someone should update their CVC handbook
 

Cadbury

Junior Member
Be more careful

I myself am a teenager, and i don't think that all teens should be branded a bad driver or reckless driver, because i myself am a defensive driver. I'm glad that you won your case but wouldn't it be better to drive safer next time and spare the shame for the rest of us.:eek: My brother had a similar experience when he was driving, but he wasn't as knowledgeable in law, so he was having a hard time fighting his case.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

CdwJava

Senior Member
Sadly, the 16-19 year old age group is involved in 5 times as many serious injury and fatal collisions than any other age band, and traffic collisions are still the leading cause of death for this age group. This is why we have those restrictions, and why the police cite for it.

- Carl
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

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