Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    9

    Default When Will a Judge Give You a Break Based On Your Reasons for Speeding

    My question involves traffic court in the State of: Washington.



    I received a ticket for going 86 in a 70 heading downhill westbound on I-90, a couple miles west of the pass. I said essentially nothing to the police officer except 'i don't know' and 'thank you' so that his written statement would be minimal.



    My plan for the trial is to plead for a dismissal based on circumstances around the infraction and the lack of evidence disproving my statements with the hope the judge will use reason and enforce the PURPOSE of the law and not the law itself. I'd like to know if anyone has had success with something like this or if i'm pissing in the wind.

    My arguments will be:
    - I have a clean record with no prior infractions
    - I always drive at a speed in which I am in full control of the vehicle and can safely react to adverse situations that occur on the road
    - I always leave a significant distance between myself and any vehicles in front of me
    - I always signal when changing lanes
    - I always slow down when approaching and passing vehicles which are moving significantly slower than me
    - I was traveling down hill with my cruise control set, which i have noticed will sometimes exceed the preset limit in these situations by as much as 7 mph
    - It was a clear day, with dry roads, and limited traffic

    - The purpose of a speed limit is to promote a safe environment for vehicles to operate. It accomplishes this by minimizing accidents that result from drivers who exceed the maximum speed at which they can maintain control of their vehicle given the environment in which they are operating it. As I was not exceeding the speed at which I could maintain control of my vehicle in that specific environment, I was not violating the principal which the law was meant to enforce.

    On these grounds I would ask for a dismissal of my infraction.

    If the court deems that my evidence in not sufficient argument in light of the plaintiff's sworn testimony, then I ask that my infraction be changed to a non-moving violation or deferred as allowed by the state.

    Thoughts?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    19,901

    Default Re: [Wa State] Traffic Tickets - Do Judges Listen to Reason or Play by the Book

    The purpose of the law is that people abide by the speed limits. The fact that you have a clean record might call for mitigating some sanctions but if you could play the "I have a clean record" card to get out of a citation, nobody would ever be convicted.

    The fact that you felt you were in control of your vehicle, that you use your turn signals, that you follow at a safe distance, that you slow down when advisable, etc... is ALL immaterial. You weren't charged with any of those things and I'm not sure why you think that indicating there are SOME laws you choose to obey means anything with the speeding charge.

    The "I had my cruise control set" line is tried with great regularity. Your point is further unlikely because it indicates that you intentionally set it for a speed in excess of the the speed limit anyhow.

    The prima facie limit is predicated on good conditions and light traffic. In other cases you are expected to drive even slower if necessary. You'll not get anywhere arguing you should be allowed to speed because it was sunny.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    38,867

    Default Re: [Wa State] Traffic Tickets - Do Judges Listen to Reason or Play by the Book

    My arguments will be:
    - I have a clean record with no prior infractions
    this is the only claim being provable

    - I always drive at a speed in which I am in full control of the vehicle and can safely react to adverse situations that occur on the road
    you can make any claim you want but obviously, there is no proof your claim is true

    - I always leave a significant distance between myself and any vehicles in front of me
    ibid

    - I always signal when changing lanes
    ibid

    - I always slow down when approaching and passing vehicles which are moving significantly slower than me
    ibid

    I consider myself to be a very good driver and comply with the laws but honestly, I cannot make such a claim as; I always... Such a claim is unrealistic.


    - I was traveling down hill with my cruise control set, which i have noticed will sometimes exceed the preset limit in these situations by as much as 7 mph
    cruise control will not do anything more than completely close the throttle (and the associated actions; decreasing fuel input and such). It will not apply your brakes so if the decline is great enough, depending on your cruise control to maintain your speed is an incorrect action.

    - It was a clear day, with dry roads, and limited traffic
    so you could justify driving 70. Of course you do understand that if the weather was inclement, the speed limit is actually reduced as the ability to drive safely at any given speed results in a lower speed limit, right?

    - The purpose of a speed limit is to promote a safe environment for vehicles to operate. It accomplishes this by minimizing accidents that result from drivers who exceed the maximum speed at which they can maintain control of their vehicle given the environment in which they are operating it. As I was not exceeding the speed at which I could maintain control of my vehicle in that specific environment, I was not violating the principal which the law was meant to enforce.
    so, the 33 people that drove at the Indy 500 this year should be allowed to drive in excess of 200 mph? You have what is called a per se violation. The limit is 70. Anything above that is a violation, period. A per quod argument is not typically an accepted argument because it requires an accident to prove you were driving above a safe speed limit. That isn't how it works.

    On these grounds I would ask for a dismissal of my infraction.
    so, what are you going to say when the judge asks; well, were you speeding?

    If the court deems that my evidence in not sufficient argument in light of the plaintiff's sworn testimony, then I ask that my infraction be changed to a non-moving violation or deferred as allowed by the state.
    You can always ask.

    Thoughts?
    Ya. Nowhere in this entire post did you rebut the claim you were speeding and personally, I think that is all the judge is going to care about.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    3,577

    Default Re: [Wa State] Traffic Tickets - Do Judges Listen to Reason or Play by the Book

    In MOST courts in WA, once you begin the hearing, a deferral is taken off the table. Most judges will NOT 1) find you guilty and then 2) defer those findings (although I have seen it happen -- maybe .5% chance). They will almost always allow you to defer BEFORE you begin, however. As far as reducing the charge to a non-moving violation, again, once you've been found guilty of speeding, WHY ON EARTH would the judge reduce that? It's not uncommon for the judge to "reduce" the fine, but you still end up with a speeding ticket on your record. If you want a reduction in the charge, you will probably have to bargain for it BEFORE the hearing begins -- if there's even a prosecutor there to bargain with.

    My advice: get a copy of the officer's statement through discovery. Come back and post it here. There MAY, indeed, be something contained in it (or left out) that can earn you a dismissal. But, I agree with Ron and JK, I think you have very little chance with your current approach.

    Barry

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    9

    Default Re: [Wa State] Traffic Tickets - Do Judges Listen to Reason or Play by the Book

    Ok well that certainly made it clear - thanks guys. I appreciate your time evaluating my argument. I must say it's saddens me that the courts operate like this and judges either choose not to or aren't allowed to use their brain, but I understand the efficiency of it. In hindsight I guess I was a bit naive in thinking otherwise.

    I sent in my discovery request on Monday and when I get the documents back from it I will post on here for further advice.

    In the mean time, I'm curious to know, if judges make decisions to either defer or change an infraction to a non-moving violation PRIOR to any discussion, on what do they base their decision?

    [EDIT - UPDATED w/ question on certification]

    So it looks like the certificate for the laser used on my vehicle is available online and it contains the same boilerplate language which was grounds for dismissal in other cases. From memory I believe the summary argument behind the statement indicates that 'someone' certified the device but not specifically the persons writing the document and indicated as experts, thus disqualifying the certification.

    https://fortress.wa.gov/wsp/smdsearc...ationPrint/279

    Should this be sufficient?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    19,901

    Default Re: [Wa State] Traffic Tickets - Do Judges Listen to Reason or Play by the Book

    Huh? What makes you think they aren't using their brain. Nothing you stated has anything to mitigate the fact that you were 16 miles over the limit. You're lucky they're more "intelligent" in Washington. I can almost guarantee you you'd be facing JAIL TIME here in Virginia.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    3,577

    Default Re: [Wa State] Traffic Tickets - Do Judges Listen to Reason or Play by the Book

    Under MOST circumstances, a JUDGE cannot "change" the infraction -- it takes a prosecutor to do that. If there's a prosecutor present, you can try to talk to him/her before the court session begins. But, be CAREFUL what you say -- if you tell them too much about your case, they will use it against you when the hearing begins.

    Judges ordinarily grant deferrals to anyone who's eligible -- meaning no other deferrals within the past 7 years and no CDL. BTW, your "link" does not work. Are you referring to the Mociulski argument? If so, there are several threads about it -- do a search. It does NOT always work -- looks like 2 out 3 times, or so.

    Barry

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    9

    Default Re: [Wa State] Traffic Tickets - Do Judges Listen to Reason or Play by the Book

    Quote Quoting blewis
    View Post
    Under MOST circumstances, a JUDGE cannot "change" the infraction -- it takes a prosecutor to do that. If there's a prosecutor present, you can try to talk to him/her before the court session begins. But, be CAREFUL what you say -- if you tell them too much about your case, they will use it against you when the hearing begins.

    Judges ordinarily grant deferrals to anyone who's eligible -- meaning no other deferrals within the past 7 years and no CDL. BTW, your "link" does not work. Are you referring to the Mociulski argument? If so, there are several threads about it -- do a search. It does NOT always work -- looks like 2 out 3 times, or so.

    Barry
    Correct - the Mociulski argument.

    Try this:

    Go to: https://fortress.wa.gov/wsp/smdsearch/
    Search for: L1385

    [EDIT: Adding note about using two radar tests]

    One other note, not sure what if any impact this has the case, but the officer noted both a LIDAR and RADAR test. The RADAR test he used was for a BEE-III which is a MOVING RADAR. His exact statement was

    'SPEED L1385 + R2414'
    '1052FT LN2 INTO LN3 $175.00'

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    3,577

    Default Re: [Wa State] Traffic Tickets - Do Judges Listen to Reason or Play by the Book

    My advice is to research Mociulski. Anything else is just speculation. Wait till your discovery materials arrive.

    Barry

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    9

    Default Re: [Wa State] Traffic Tickets - Do Judges Listen to Reason or Play by the Book

    Quote Quoting blewis
    View Post
    My advice is to research Mociulski. Anything else is just speculation. Wait till your discovery materials arrive.

    Barry
    Will do. Thank you for your time Barry - much appreciated. I'll start a new thread once the materials arrive.

    Cheers.

    1. Sponsored Links
       

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Post-Conviction Relief: Appeal Based on Biased Judge
    By blazer217 in forum Criminal Procedure
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-02-2011, 06:23 PM
  2. Trials and Verdicts: Must a Judge Explain the Reasons for a Legal Finding
    By BLIND JUSTICE in forum Civil Procedure
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 04-02-2011, 06:36 AM
  3. Speeding Tickets: Reasons for Dismissal of a Speeding Ticket
    By Kelly1965 in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-06-2010, 03:24 PM
  4. Speeding Tickets: Speeding Ticket Based on Pace
    By Nurud in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 08-05-2008, 01:09 PM
  5. Rental Agreements: What are Legal Reasons to Break a Lease?
    By kexley28 in forum Landlord-Tenant Law
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-25-2008, 03:58 PM
 
 
Sponsored Links

Legal Help, Information and Resources