CA Speed Trap Law Question

[Zigner]

Seems this thread may have run the course...

 

[I_Got_Banned]

Seems this thread may have run the course...

It may seem otherwise if you were half as bored as I am!

 

[davew128]

Show me some respect Dave. Not only because I deserve it

By the way, respect is earned not given freely. E-thug indeed. I said I would agree to disagree. You didn't accept that.

Cooper never attempted to argue an electronic device was used. If he had and the court accepted a speedometer as such, it WOULD have required the traffic and engineering study be submitted. You contend its a ridiculous argument to make. Why? Because its never been successful? As far as we can tell it's never been made. My argument isn't about pacing in a generic sense. It's the tools used for pacing. Historically the argument would have been frivolous because speedometers were mechanical. That they aren't now doesn't change anything? That's rather foolish., Again, I don't believe lay people know much about speedometers and that includes both the police and the judges. If you believe otherwise, please say so.

Moving along, if an officer says he paces you, you ask him what method he used to determine the speed during the pace. If he mentions his speedometer at all, then any fair minded judge should listen to the argument. If he says visual estimation, then there is no speed trap issue and perhaps other issues can be raised but they are not relevant to this discussion. Think about it logically. Under the letter of the law as it is written, why should using the speedometer to measure speed during a pace be any different than if say dashboard radar was used to confirm speed? One is specifically referenced by name in the law, the other by reference to the category of device it is.

Again, keep in mind we all know what legislative intent was. It's not in dispute. Nor is what the law says. We are disagreeing on the application. You believe I have no shot and think the judges will dismiss it out of hand. That may very well be but if that is the case, it certainly won't be because of a deficient legal argument and presentation on my account. More likely based on observational accounts given here, it will be due to an institutional bias against defendants in traffic court. That is something I think we can both agree on.

 

[Zigner]

Again - post back when your results...you will likely lose, but it's worth a shot, huh?

 

[davew128]

Case Dismissed!

Sorry Jim, it wasn't because of a legal argument. The ticket was considered defective and violated my rights.

I went to traffic court this afternoon while I was off from work, mainly to inquire why a 19MPH over speeding ticket was so high for a fine and why traffic school wasn't being allowed. The clerk pulled the record and the fine was based on 64 in a 25. We looked at our respective copies of the ticket and sure enough, although 64 in a 45 was handwritten in the notes, the PF Speed section showed 25 (four lane divided road is 65), even though the sections for posted and safe speeds both showed 45. He asked if I wanted to go upstairs and take care of the ticket in terms of my intentions and said absolutely.

About an hour later I was called before the commissioner, and rather than entering a plea asked for a moment's indulgence pointing out that I was being deprived of my right to choose traffic school as well as an incorrect bail/fine regardless of how I chose to proceed due to the incorrect ticket. Maybe I got lucky, maybe he liked the t-shirt I wore but he dismissed the ticket.

For the record, the fine SHOULD have been about $265 instead of the $401 that was indicated on my courtesy notice.

Thanks to Jim for the support and especially to IGB for your positive attitude.

 

[Zigner]

Too bad you never got to test your "theory"

 

[davew128]

Too bad you never got to test your "theory"

Hey a win is a win.

 

[seniorjudge]

Hey a win is a win.

Maybe you'll get to try your theory when it gets refiled.

 

[I_Got_Banned]

Maybe you'll get to try your theory when it gets refiled.

Or when he wakes up and realizes his "visit to court and his within the hour appearance before the judge" was nothing but a dream.

I mean, how does a data entry error which can be corrected in court in a matter of seconds, violate a defendant's rights in any way?

 

[JIMinCA]

Or when he wakes up and realizes his "visit to court and his within the hour appearance before the judge" was nothing but a dream.

I mean, how does a data entry error which can be corrected in court in a matter of seconds, violate a defendant's rights in any way?

Dude... are you kidding?? Not only do you read the future such that you can tell Dave that he WILL be guilty, now you are callin him a liar because he got his case dismissed!!! Did you slip on your puddle of tears and hit your head?

I guess you are a bit upset about the outcome of Dave's ticket since you made all those posts about his upcoming conviction. Seems you aren't quite as smart as you would like to be. I guess that's why you didn't take my challenge... because you recognize the fact that you are just a blow-hard.... just like the rest of us do!!

 

[davew128]

Or when he wakes up and realizes his "visit to court and his within the hour appearance before the judge" was nothing but a dream.

It wasn't a trial judge genius, and yes people at that traffic court do go right up for their pleadings.

I mean, how does a data entry error which can be corrected in court in a matter of seconds, violate a defendant's rights in any way?

You mean other than if I had plead guilty and paid the fine, the fine would have been $135 too high? Or that because of the error, my right to attend traffic school was denied because I was being charged with driving 39 over the speed limit instead of 19, because you can't be more than 25 over the posted limit and be eligible?

Oh and for the record, it wasn't the court's error it was the officer's.

 

[CdwJava]

Dave, only the clerk of the court can deny you traffic school for 25 over - the judge can still grant it.

- Carl