Re: Incorrectly Cited for Failure to Stop
Your description of where the officer was when all this happened and equally, where the truck was, how far into the intersection he was when you noticed him and how far into the intersection you were when you noticed him might help if only to give us an idea of what the officer saw, might be meaningless but it might help too.
(a) The driver of any vehicle approaching a stop sign at the entrance to, or within, an intersection shall stop at a limit line, if marked, otherwise before entering the crosswalk on the near side of the intersection.
If there is no limit line or crosswalk, the driver shall stop at the entrance to the intersecting roadway.
That is what the code section states... Those few words that I underlined pretty much describe your responsibility upon approach to a stop sign. They do in fact describe TWO elements, not just one. meaning you MUST stop, but you MUST also do so at the limit line or the close line marking the crosswalk and if none, then before crossing what I would call the imaginary lateral line perpendicular to your path of travel.
More often than not, most people who are cited for a stop sign violation, may have actually fulfilled the requirement to momentarily stop, however, they either did so far behind the limit line where they were unable to get a clear view of cross traffic, or they stopped PAST the line which is also a violation of the code section.
In this case, you admit you were on the phone, you couldn't deny you were distracted.... It would be pretty obvious that you can now come back and say "But I did stop, and I did so at the line", and of course I wasn't there so I will not argue with you, the problem is, the officer did witness something and he felt a citation was warranted... If he does testify that you either rolled the stop or that you stopped short/before or after passing the line, you really are left with little if any options... Sure you can say "NO, I DID STOP AND I DID SO LEGALLY AND AT THE LINE" still, when it comes to "he said, I said" battles like this one, the officer will win 99.999% of the time!
What sinks you even deeper here is that you even went as far as giving the officer an implied admission that you did something wrong and you knew it simply when you told him "yes I saw him after I had already gone and that I gave them the 'Im sorry' wave"...
If you feel you were wrongly cited, by all means, you are within your rights to fight it...
I think there is a good chance the officer might volunteer that info without being asked.... That part as well as admitting "the wave". Not much you can do about either now though...
Hmmm... I am not so sure lying in court, under oath, is that great of an idea.... It is not likely to add that much value to your version of the story, instead, conflicting with what the officer says will put a huge hole in your credibility... You may be better off not saying a word (as in not testifying) and only questioning the officer if you hear any discrepancies in his statements from what you remember!
I am right 97% of the time... Who cares about the other 4%!