California Traffic School Twice, Will It Fly

[kholt44]

My question involves traffic court in the State of: CA

Hello All,

Thanks for reading.

Received speeding ticket, paid bail, and accepted traffic school. I have not yet completed traffic school for speeding ticket, then received red light camera ticket in another jurisdiction. Court offered me traffic school (apparently thinking I'm eligible because I haven't completed traffic school for the first ticket). Will I get away with traffic school for both tickets, or will I end up with a point on my record??

Kevin

[adam_]

Huh. Good question.

I know the policy is to require 18 months 'separation', but the court can over-rule that policy. In this case, your question is "does the offer from the court in fact mean they are over-ruling the policy".

Do you know that the red light ticket is valid? highwayrobbery.net for more info.

GL

A

[That Guy]

My question involves traffic court in the State of: CA

Hello All,

Thanks for reading.

Received speeding ticket, paid bail, and accepted traffic school. I have not yet completed traffic school for speeding ticket, then received red light camera ticket in another jurisdiction. Court offered me traffic school (apparently thinking I'm eligible because I haven't completed traffic school for the first ticket). Will I get away with traffic school for both tickets, or will I end up with a point on my record??

Kevin

Won't fly... Once you complete one traffic school and get a dismissal of the one citation, that info goes into the system and is easily accessible by other courts (as well as by the DMV).

Even if the second court does not notice the first dismissal, the DMV will reject the second dismissal (yes, a the DMV will still be notified of citation that was dismissed after completing traffic school) by virtue of your record reflecting a dismissal within the past 18 months.

[kholt44]

Thanks for the replies.

Even if the second court does not notice the first dismissal, the DMV will reject the second dismissal (yes, a the DMV will still be notified of citation that was dismissed after completing traffic school) by virtue of your record reflecting a dismissal within the past 18 months.

Understood, but:

1. Isn't the court allowed to give traffic school again? From what I've read, if they do, I'll get 0 points, but insurance company will find out because the 2nd one is not "confidential" - sound right? Which begs the question, is it worth paying extra for traffic school on the 2nd violation?

2. Anyway conceivable to fight red light camera? The only argument I could make is the signage warning of red light cameras at the intersection are set far back from the intersection (probably 100-150 feet).

thanks again

[That Guy]

1. Isn't the court allowed to give traffic school again? From what I've read, if they do, I'll get 0 points, but insurance company will find out because the 2nd one is not "confidential" - sound right? Which begs the question, is it worth paying extra for traffic school on the 2nd violation?

That is more commonly referred to as the level 2 traffic school. It is not offered by every court and is up to the discretion of the judge. Simply electing traffic school does not necessarily mean that it will count as such and maybe incorrectly classified by the clerk and improperly reported to the DMV.

2. Anyway conceivable to fight red light camera? The only argument I could make is the signage warning of red light cameras at the intersection are set far back from the intersection (probably 100-150 feet).

You can read VC Section 21455.5 and you'll see that the signing requirement is pretty broad in that it does not mention a specific distance where those signs must be placed so long as they "clearly indicate the system's presence and are visible to traffic approaching from all directions, or posts signs at all major entrances to the city, including, at a minimum, freeways, bridges, and state highway routes".

Edited to add: You can look through the California MUTCD to see what the recommendation/guidance on placing such sign is... To me, 100 to 150 feet sounds reasonable enough to fit within the definition of "visible to traffic approaching the intersection"...

[adam_]

Thanks for the replies.



Understood, but:

1. Isn't the court allowed to give traffic school again? From what I've read, if they do, I'll get 0 points, but insurance company will find out because the 2nd one is not "confidential" - sound right? Which begs the question, is it worth paying extra for traffic school on the 2nd violation?

2. Anyway conceivable to fight red light camera? The only argument I could make is the signage warning of red light cameras at the intersection are set far back from the intersection (probably 100-150 feet).

thanks again

The court IS allowed. I don't know how the second one shows up, I try to keep it to one conviction every 18 months. (knocks on wood)

I'd always try and keep points down... for me it'd be worth it.

Did you go to highwayrobbery.net? They have a very good set of 'strategies' for proceeding. Is it a real ticket, etc.

The Warning Sign only needs to be "at the main roads into the city" ... not just at the intersection! This is why (for example) there is a 'photo enforced' sign on US I-5 south of Stockton, CA in the middle of nowhere..,

A