• 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.

Following too close

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

stmorgan27

Junior Member
Hi, I live in Oregon and just received a ticket for following too closely. I want to plea not guilty but I am not sure if it's worth it. So it was 12 at night and I came up behind a unmarked suv cop. For some reason he sat at the stop sign with nobody coming for way too long. Then as he went through the stop sign he accelerated to 5mph and continued with this while the speed limit being 25mph. Not knowing what was going on I apparently got too close behind him wondering what was going on (maybe a drunk driver i thought) The cop drove 5mph for a block and then pulled off to the side of the road, so I passed him, he then pulled me over. I feel its ridiculous to get a ticket for following too close when the driver is going 20mph under the speed limit. Is this worth pleading not guilty to? Thanks
 


FlyingRon

Senior Member
Too close is too close. While the following distance necessary is greater at greater speeds you can't just tailgate people because you perceive they are driving too slowly. Stay back or legally pass them.

If you believed someone was drunk, common sense would tell you to stay even FURTHER away for them.
 

Maestro64

Member
Following too close is subjective ticket since it is highly speed dependent and yours and the car in front of you ability to stop.

With that said, If the officer feels you were following too close how did he make the determination, how did he measure the time or distance to say it was too close. If you read the law no where does it state a distance of time between car, however you can fall back on what is universally understood which is 2 second spacing.

Now if he was only going 5 mph like you said the 2 sec guideline say your following distance should not be less then 16 feet, less then on car length. If you assume 25mph the distance is now 70 ft or 3.5 car lengths on average. So depend on the real speed when he made determination of too close you could have been okay from a distance of 16 feet to 70 ft.

Unless he can stay you were in fact with in those guideline and back it up with sound method of determine the distance (guessing is not good enough) you could convince the judge the officer was being subject and had no facts to base the ticket on.

So where there cars park along side the road that he could judge the distance based on them, or maybe phone poles which are about 100 ft spacing. People can judge distances but poor a measuring time.

The only things you got going against you is OR is civil state when it comes to ticket, the state only have to show you were more likely than not to have been following too close.
 

Zigner

Senior Member, Non-Attorney
Following too close is subjective ticket since it is highly speed dependent and yours and the car in front of you ability to stop.

With that said, If the officer feels you were following too close how did he make the determination, how did he measure the time or distance to say it was too close. If you read the law no where does it state a distance of time between car, however you can fall back on what is universally understood which is 2 second spacing.

Now if he was only going 5 mph like you said the 2 sec guideline say your following distance should not be less then 16 feet, less then on car length. If you assume 25mph the distance is now 70 ft or 3.5 car lengths on average. So depend on the real speed when he made determination of too close you could have been okay from a distance of 16 feet to 70 ft.

Unless he can stay you were in fact with in those guideline and back it up with sound method of determine the distance (guessing is not good enough) you could convince the judge the officer was being subject and had no facts to base the ticket on.

So where there cars park along side the road that he could judge the distance based on them, or maybe phone poles which are about 100 ft spacing. People can judge distances but poor a measuring time.

The only things you got going against you is OR is civil state when it comes to ticket, the state only have to show you were more likely than not to have been following too close.
Oh brother :rolleyes:

Let's cut to the chase. OP has only a biased, self-serving witness to present testimony.

The police officer is an expert, unbiased witness presenting testimony.
 

You Are Guilty

Senior Member
"Universally understood 2 second rule"?

How about citing a STATUTE for that universe instead? None that I know of call for a 2-second rule.
 

Maestro64

Member
"Universally understood 2 second rule"?

How about citing a STATUTE for that universe instead? None that I know of call for a 2-second rule.
Exactly my point, most following too close statutes make no definitive non subjective measure of how you determine if the space between two vehicle is too close. It is left to the individual to determine and not uniform. So when the laws is vague you have to relay on other information. In this case you can get information form NHSA and the Insurance institute which both state the guideline is 2 second of spacing.

Let put it this way, I read more case laws where the officer stop an individual for following too close and then arrest the person for other illegal activities only to have the more serious charge tossed because the officer could not explain or articulate the method he use to determine how the cars was following too close. If a lawyer can get more serious charge tossed on the simple fact they could not accurately determine following distance, it is not too hard to get a following too close ticket tossed on the same grounds.
 

stmorgan27

Junior Member
so should I tell the judge that the cop has no proof that I was following too close because he was in front of me? I know this is not likely to work because the cop is always right in their eyes.
 

Zigner

Senior Member, Non-Attorney
so should I tell the judge that the cop has no proof that I was following too close because he was in front of me? I know this is not likely to work because the cop is always right in their eyes.
No, that is NOT why it won't work.

It won't work because you have NO evidence of what you say. In fact, you have reason to fabricate evidence.

The police officer is an expert at this and has NO reason to fabricate evidence.

(Testimony is evidence)
 

Maestro64

Member
so should I tell the judge that the cop has no proof that I was following too close because he was in front of me? I know this is not likely to work because the cop is always right in their eyes.
You do not have to provide evidence, you just rip apart the officer testimony since it is only his words and his opinion, and opinion are not fact, just because he think it was too close is not enough in itself if you challenge it.

Most people do not challenge the officer testimony and simple fact you do not challenge tells the judge his words are true. What you want to stay away from is the he said you said argument you will lose. You simple ask him question about how did he determine you were following too close, he did some how measure it, if so what method did he use. then by the law what distance is consider too close at that point he will not be able to say since no laws say exact what is too close. So at point it was purely his opinion not fact that he base the ticket on.

anyway this might help you, it Oregon's own recommendation on following and the site the 2 sec rule

http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/TS/police/tailgatingbro.pdf

I am assuming you were sited for 811.485 Following too closely; penalty. (1) A person commits the offense of following too closely if the person does any of the following:

(a) Drives a vehicle so as to follow another vehicle more closely than is reasonable and prudent, having due regard for the speed of the vehicles and the traffic upon, and condition of, the highway.

As i said above, following distance is about speed and cars ability to stop and people reactions time. The officer only knows 1 of 3 factors and he making assumption about the other two and police are not experts in physics, and human physiology.

The key to the above law is reasonable and prude and this is subjected and up to the individual.

Maybe he sited you for

811.150 Interference with emergency vehicle or ambulance; penalty. (1) A person commits the offense of interference with an emergency vehicle or ambulance if the person does any of the following:

(a) Drives a vehicle following at a distance closer than 500 feet any emergency vehicle or ambulance that is traveling in response to a fire alarm or emergency.

So you could not have been within 500 feet of him if he was on an emergency call. This law was put in place to keep from tailgating through the automated redlight that turn green in the direction the emergency vehicle is going.
 

stmorgan27

Junior Member
He had no reason to pull me over, he just needed something to use because he wanted to see if i was an illegal driver or under the influence, so he illegally went 20mph under the speed limit. I dont see how this is my fault. In my manual car I cant even go that slow or it will die or shake really bad.

my sister is a lawyer and this is the advise she gave me.
1. Call Court Clerk, ask to speak with the prosecutor or counselor assigned to your case.
2. Tell them that you are not guilty and plan to plead not guilty at the hearing. Ask them if they would be willing to dismiss the charges.
3. If not ask them, if they would be interesting in pleading down the violation to avoid a trial and to reduce costs.
4. Be firm and do not admit guilt but also be very, very polite, so that the prosecutor will work with you.
 

Zigner

Senior Member, Non-Attorney
You do not have to provide evidence, you just rip apart the officer testimony since it is only his words and his opinion, and opinion are not fact, just because he think it was too close is not enough in itself if you challenge it.
What a crock of horse-hockey.
The officer will present EXPERT TESTIMONY as evidence. Sure, it's an opinion, but it's an EXPERT opinion based on training and years of experience. In order to refute the expert testimony, the defendant will need to present evidence that is contrary to the EXPERT OPINION presented by the officer.

And, how's that gonna happen? :rolleyes:
 

You Are Guilty

Senior Member
What a crock of horse-hockey.
I concur with the sentiment, however, let's approach it this way. If Maestro is correct and an officer "only knows 1 of 3 elements" required in determining safe following distances, then EVERYONE cited under this section would, by definition, never be found guilty. In which case, if no one was ever convicted of following too closely, then there wouldn't be any need for a statute covering it. Now since we know there IS a statute, we can safely assume that an officer's testimony is sufficient evidence to find you guilty.

The problem with Maestro's "analysis" is that its not the officer's opinion of what is reasonable and prudent that matters, it's the judge's.

OP, please come back after your hearing to let us know how it went.
 

Maestro64

Member
He had no reason to pull me over, he just needed something to use because he wanted to see if i was an illegal driver or under the influence, so he illegally went 20mph under the speed limit. I dont see how this is my fault. In my manual car I cant even go that slow or it will die or shake really bad.

my sister is a lawyer and this is the advise she gave me.
1. Call Court Clerk, ask to speak with the prosecutor or counselor assigned to your case.
2. Tell them that you are not guilty and plan to plead not guilty at the hearing. Ask them if they would be willing to dismiss the charges.
3. If not ask them, if they would be interesting in pleading down the violation to avoid a trial and to reduce costs.
4. Be firm and do not admit guilt but also be very, very polite, so that the prosecutor will work with you.
Does your sister practice law in Oregon, if she does she would know traffic infraction in Oregon are considered civil matters therefore a prosecutor is not require as a matter of course, the officer may not even be required to show at the hearing. Even in state where tickets are criminal a prosecutor is not always required to show, only if jail time could be the outcome. It could be just you and the judge. She is correct not to admit any guilt at any time since most people are convicted on their own words independent of any testimony any officer might give.

I listed the statute and like most following too close statutes they use the words reasonable and prudent and this is the matter you have to address, however it is an up hill battle since the judge only has to feel you were more likely then not to have done what the ticket says. Unlike in a state where ticket are still criminal and you have to be guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

You are probably correct that the officer was looking for a reason to initiate a stop and subjective laws are perfect for creating probably cause since it hard to prove one way or another, but these are also the reason more serious cases get tossed too.

Good luck
 

stmorgan27

Junior Member
no she doesn't. she practices in Missouri. well sounds like I am screwed which sucks, because I'm in college and can't afford to pay for a ticket.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

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