Red-light camera ticket

[sesame.cashew]

California - LA County

I received a ticket for violation VC 21453c:
A driver facing a steady red arrow signal shall not enter the intersection to make the movement indicated by the arrow and, unless entering the intersection to make a movement permitted by another signal, shall stop at a clearly marked limit line, but if none, before entering the crosswalk on the near side of the intersection, or if none, then before entering the intersection, and shall remain stopped until an indication permitting movement is shown.

I stopped my car abruptly from making a left turn and my vehicle ended the middle of the crosswalk of a large intersection. I did not impede the flow of traffic from any directions from where I stopped. I was also wearing sunglasses in my picture.

1) What are my chances of successfully fighting this ticket through trial by declaration?
2) What arguing points should I use? Is it better to ask for a fine reduction for not running the red light or challenge the identity of the driver?
3) Do I need to hire a lawyer? I've gotten a quote from one but he said his fees are $400, which is too much for me and is close to the bail amount. I'm still asking around for quotes.
4) Any suggestions for next steps?

Thanks!

 

[Ohiogal]

California - LA County

I received a ticket for violation VC 21453c:
A driver facing a steady red arrow signal shall not enter the intersection to make the movement indicated by the arrow and, unless entering the intersection to make a movement permitted by another signal, shall stop at a clearly marked limit line, but if none, before entering the crosswalk on the near side of the intersection, or if none, then before entering the intersection, and shall remain stopped until an indication permitting movement is shown.

I stopped my car abruptly from making a left turn and my vehicle ended the middle of the crosswalk of a large intersection. I did not impede the flow of traffic from any directions from where I stopped. I was also wearing sunglasses in my picture.

1) What are my chances of successfully fighting this ticket through trial by declaration?
2) What arguing points should I use? Is it better to ask for a fine reduction for not running the red light or challenge the identity of the driver?
3) Do I need to hire a lawyer? I've gotten a quote from one but he said his fees are $400, which is too much for me and is close to the bail amount. I'm still asking around for quotes.
4) Any suggestions for next steps?

Thanks!

Why do you think you are innocent? You stopped in the MIDDLE of the crosswalk which is prohibited by the law you quoted. You are guilty.

 

[Zigner]

Why do you think you are innocent? You stopped in the MIDDLE of the crosswalk which is prohibited by the law you quoted. You are guilty.

I agree with this, however, red light camera tickets in Los Angeles County are a bit problematic. It would behoove the OP to search the web for information about and advice on fighting red light tickets in this county.

 

[Pugilist2]

You can ignore a ticket from a camera inside LA County, including the camera tickets issued by Culver City, BH, WeHo, Covina, Montebello, Commerce, and Hawthorne, as well as from the cameras adjacent to the MTA/Metro rail lines and on Canoga Ave. near the Valley busway. But only if you do not contact the court. Skeptical? Search red light camera no consequence.

If you're not comfortable ignoring the ticket - or if you've already contacted the court - then you should contact the police dept. that issued the ticket and ask if they have a "deal" where they arrange with the court to accept a lower fine on minor tickets like rolling rights or like yours, where you
stopped, just a few feet too late. If the "deal" they offer is unsatisfactory, then consider fighting, either via declaration or with an attorney. I think you
have a good chance that a judge will view this ticket as Mickey Mouse/unfair, and dismiss it if you or an atty take it to trial.

 

[AgentSmithers]

Interesting read, It kinda always escaped me from time to time on how the whole Red Light ticket's scheme worked without signing a Promise to appear and how it all tied into PC 853.9 / CVC40513. *Shrugs*. Still kinda jaring that an FTA would stick on an uncertified letter unless we signed something off at the DMV when we applied for our license, kinda like implied consent.

 

[HighwayMan]

Kinda like Roadside FST's.

Huh? If you're referring to implied consent, it has nothing to do with field sobriety tests.

 

[CdwJava]

Interesting read, It kinda always escaped me from time to time on how the whole Red Light ticket's scheme worked without signing a Promise to appear and how it all tied into PC 853.9 / CVC40513. *Shrugs*. Still kinda jaring that an FTA would stick on an uncertified letter unless we signed something off at the DMV when we applied for our license, Kinda like Roadside FST's.

You cannot get an FTA for failing to show for a mailed VC 21453(c) ticket. And the OP didn't say they were being hit with an FTA.

As for the FSTs, there is no legal requirement in CA that you conduct FSTs if asked. These are voluntary,though an officer is not required to tell you that. The law only requires that he tell you that any PBT (field breath test, a preliminary breath test) is optional and that takingit will not preclude you from taking the mandated chemical test if arrested for DUI. And, there IS a legal requirement (referred to as "implied consent") that you provide a chemical test if arrested for DUI.

 

[AgentSmithers]

Yes, my mistake on the FST.

 

[Just Blue]

What ended up happening? DdI the same thing and I don’t know if I’m going to get a ticket? If I do can I contest it? Did you win your case

The original poster of this thread hasn't been back in over two years. If you have a question please start your own thread.