CA speed trap. what to bring to court

[CaliforniaBear]

49 mph in a 35 mph zone that you think should be 40 mph.

You do realize that 49 > 40, right? So even if this were a speed trap, you are still going above the recommended speed.

sure, but if the court finds the survey invalid, the officer immediately becomes an invalid witness, and the court loses jurisdiction. it's kind of like when the court finds the officer violated the 4th amendment and the whole case is thrown out of court even though the court knows the person was guilty

 

[Zigner]

49 mph in a 35 mph zone that you think should be 40 mph.

You do realize that 49 > 40, right? So even if this were a speed trap, you are still going above the recommended speed.

The problem, as the OP has posted, is that if the use of a speed trap, as defined in California law, was involved, then the officer is no considered credible, nor is any other information about the OP's speed. In other words, the state has no evidence (not even the officer's testimony) of what speed the OP was traveling. At this point, it all boils down to whether or not this was a speed trap. The OP thinks it was, I don't agree...but it really doesn't matter what I think...only what the court rules.

 

[CaliforniaBear]

Even if you disagree about the survey, I would appreciate if you could please answer a more technical legal question. Can I or should I refer to some of the cases tried in other courts, such as People vs Goulet, in support of the idea that the survey can be invalidated in court? Or should I just state my argument without referring to other cases?

 

[CaliforniaBear]

Another question, please: if I find a traffic engineer who agrees with me, is there any way for me to bring a written declaration by the engineer in court to support my argument, without having to depose the engineer as expert witness on the stand?

 

[Zigner]

Even if you disagree about the survey, I would appreciate if you could please answer a more technical legal question. Can I or should I refer to some of the cases tried in other courts, such as People vs Goulet, in support of the idea that the survey can be invalidated in court? Or should I just state my argument without referring to other cases?

It can't hurt.

 

[Zigner]

Another question, please: if I find a traffic engineer who agrees with me, is there any way for me to bring a written declaration by the engineer in court to support my argument, without having to depose the engineer as expert witness on the stand?

I don't see anything that a traffic engineer can add to this. The report (as you have conveyed it) meets the requirements set forth in the law (in my opinion). Furthermore, the traffic engineer did not perform the survey in question, nor was he present at the time(s) and place(s) that it was performed.

 

[AgentSmithers]

Even if you disagree about the survey, I would appreciate if you could please answer a more technical legal question. Can I or should I refer to some of the cases tried in other courts, such as People vs Goulet, in support of the idea that the survey can be invalidated in court? Or should I just state my argument without referring to other cases?

Well done with the research CaliforniaBear, One thing to keep in mind is that People V. Goulet is 1993 and from I recall the Supr. Court of Ventura (Unbinding). That's normally an issue for a Judge/Commissioner who states that Unsafe Speed is unhindered by the Speed trap laws, As an ins policy you may also want to bring People V. Sullivan with you.

https://law.justia.com/cases/california/court-of-appeal/3d/234/56.html

Read it carefully as it comes with an opinion that shows the Cop's Visual estimation to be included "All-Embracing"

"We believe this all-embracing language pertains not only to a radar reading obtained through maintenance of a speed trap but also to the independent observations of the officer operating the speed trap"

People V. Goulet is secondary and persuasive in court where Sullivans is Primary and Binding (Unless your hearing is in Ventura then People. V. Goulet should work).

If the Survey is valid during your research and the peace officer bring's it to court make sure it meets the definition under CVC627 and the People V. Ellis.

I hope this is helpful to yourself or anyone else.