Traffic Survey Where I Was Cited is More Than 5 Years Old - Can the Case Be Dismissed

[California student]

- After pleading Not Guilty, the judge advised me that my license could be suspended for 6 months if I am found guilty. Is this a bonus punishment they are adding because I plead not guilty, and if so, what are the chances that they will incur this punishment? My trial is in Sacramento county in the Carol Miller Justice Center.

They aren't adding it because you are contesting it, but by contesting it you're giving them the option to add it.

13200. Whenever any person licensed under this code is convicted of a violation of any provision of this code relating to the speed of vehicles or a violation of Section 23103 the court may, unless this code makes mandatory a revocation by the department, suspend the privilege of the person to operate a motor vehicle for a period of not to exceed 30 days upon a first conviction, for a period of not to exceed 60 days upon a second conviction, and for a period of not to exceed six months upon a third or any subsequent conviction.

[AJAlegria]

Well this would be my first conviction in almost 10 years, so does that mean they cannot suspend my license for more than thirty days? Why then did the judge say 6 months?

- - - Updated - - -

Well this would be my first conviction in almost 10 years, so does that mean they cannot suspend my license for more than thirty days? Why then did the judge say 6 months?

[AJAlegria]

ok, this should work and be photos of the traffic survey i was sent from the police department. The biggest possible flaw I see is that on the EastBound page, the 85th is at 48mph, thus making a 50zone appropriate, yet the posted speed limit is at 40mph. This is a TEN mph reduction, not a FIVE. The question is, does this qualify for anything in my favor because I was driving Westbound when I was cited...

here is wesbound, the direction I was travelling
http://s1057.photobucket.com/albums/...rent=west1.jpg

here is Eastbound, with the 85th at 48mph
http://s1057.photobucket.com/albums/...rrent=east.jpg

[themadnorwegian]

If only life were that simple. If this highway consisted of multiple roadways, then the city could set a different speed limit on each in accordance with 22361. However, in this case the speed limit needs to be the same on both sides of the road. For whatever reason, the city decided to survey each side of the street separately; however, the speed limit has to be the same on both sides. This means that you need to take the raw data from both sides of the street and combine it. Then calculate the aggregate 85th percentile speed. When I do this in excel, I get a 85th percentile speed of 46mph, which means that this is really only a 5mph reduction.

[AJAlegria]

good call, thank you much. Did you by any chance notice anything else possibly noteworthy?

[That Guy]

ok, this should work and be photos of the traffic survey i was sent from the police department. The biggest possible flaw I see is that on the EastBound page, the 85th is at 48mph, thus making a 50zone appropriate, yet the posted speed limit is at 40mph. This is a TEN mph reduction, not a FIVE. The question is, does this qualify for anything in my favor because I was driving Westbound when I was cited...

here is wesbound, the direction I was travelling
http://s1057.photobucket.com/albums/...rent=west1.jpg

here is Eastbound, with the 85th at 48mph
http://s1057.photobucket.com/albums/...rrent=east.jpg

Even if you can squeeze an argument invalidating the Eastbound speed limit, you're still dealing with a valid Westbound 85th %ile of 46, with the 45mph as the nearest increment, they opted to reduce that another 5mph to 40mph and they cited a number of reasons.

I actually disagree with their reasoning listed under "OTHER CONDITIONS"... Simply because 13 businesses and 8 multi family residential units would not qualify against the qualifier under VC 627(c)(1). With this being almost a mile long, they would need a total of 13 units per 1/4 mile or 52 units as a total.

However, they do list bicyclists and pedestrians, and although they qualify one as a designated lane and the other as using sidewalks, I think those two categories will always get the nod for a reduction.

good call, thank you much. Did you by any chance notice anything else possibly noteworthy?

I do see how they came up with the 3.89 A/MVM Collision rate (actually, 3.8944), but am I missing something or is there no reference (city/county/state) rate to compare that to?

Still, that is a huge accident rate, with 46,000+ vehicles per day, and 128 accidents in 2 years... Just a whole bunch of a lot of everything!

But, even if you exclude the accident rate as a possible casue to reduce the limit, you still have several other reasons (two of which I described above) to justify it.

You just picked a bad spot to speed through... And to get as high as 70mph, that simply shuts down the judge's sensory receptors.

You've

[AJAlegria]

Thanks for the in depth response(s) everyone. ThatGuy, Did you start to write more and then it cut you off or was that last word an accident?

- - - Updated - - -

Thanks for the in depth response(s) everyone. ThatGuy, Did you start to write more and then it cut you off or was that last word an accident?

[That Guy]

ThatGuy, Did you start to write more and then it cut you off or was that last word an accident?

That Guy doesn't have accidents... Not with words at least!

I simply had an extra "You've" and wanted to give it away... So I posted it!

[AJAlegria]

Alright, I have one last group of questions before I go to trial and I think I'll be as ready as I'll ever be.

-Most importantly, at what time during the trial do ask for a dismissal if the officer neglects to supply all the evidence needed to prove it wasn't a speed trap (certificate of laser training, et al)? The format for trials at this court are that first the officer gives his testimony and then I am allowed to question him. After that I give my testimony and then present evidence/witnesses. Finally the Judge will ask both of us questions s/he feels are necessary and then makes a decision.

- I sent out my discovery request before I plead not guilty, and the return sheet from the police dpartment reads : "the names and addresses of all prosecution witnesses who will testify at trial- none". Is this only because I had not enetered a plea and the officer had not yet been subpoenaed?

-2 part question. I have still not received a reply to discovery request from the DA's office. Is this also because I had it served before I entered a plea? And what is the point of sending a discovery request to the DA anyway, wont if have all the same information as the PD reply? And does not revieving anything from the DA give me any advantage? This tunred into a 3 parter I guess.

-last question. Is the 7 and 10 year clauses of the speed trap law an amendment added after all the classic speed cases such as People vs FLAXMAN, because not one of those cases ever mentions a 7 or 10 year window.

All your help is greatly needed and appreciated so thank you all in advance.

[That Guy]

-Most importantly, at what time during the trial do ask for a dismissal if the officer neglects to supply all the evidence needed to prove it wasn't a speed trap (certificate of laser training, et al)? The format for trials at this court are that first the officer gives his testimony =+-(ST THIS POINT)-+= and then I am allowed to question him. After that I give my testimony and then present evidence/witnesses. Finally the Judge will ask both of us questions s/he feels are necessary and then makes a decision.

^Marked^... Its called an 1118 motion (in reference to Penal Code section 1118 which states the following:

PC 1118. In a case tried by the court without a jury, a jury having been waived, the court on motion of the defendant or on its own motion shall order the entry of a judgment of acquittal of one or more of the offenses charged in the accusatory pleading after the evidence of the prosecution has been closed if the court, upon weighing the evidence then before it, finds the defendant not guilty of such offense or offenses. If such a motion for judgment of acquittal at the close of the evidence offered by the prosecution is not granted, the defendant may offer evidence without first having reserved that right.

- I sent out my discovery request before I plead not guilty, and the return sheet from the police dpartment reads : "the names and addresses of all prosecution witnesses who will testify at trial- none". Is this only because I had not enetered a plea and the officer had not yet been subpoenaed?

That's how they always answer that. The officer will of course be appearing.

-2 part question. I have still not received a reply to discovery request from the DA's office. Is this also because I had it served before I entered a plea? And what is the point of sending a discovery request to the DA anyway, wont if have all the same information as the PD reply? And does not revieving anything from the DA give me any advantage? This tunred into a 3 parter I guess.

There is no point in really discussing this.. If you've received discovery then it matters not where it came from, you've received it. If you haven't received discovery then you can mention it to the court prior to the beginning of your trial and the court will likely allow you to review the information by ordering the officer to provide it for your review at that point.

-last question. Is the 7 and 10 year clauses of the speed trap law an amendment added after all the classic speed cases such as People vs FLAXMAN, because not one of those cases ever mentions a 7 or 10 year window.

Unless a matter or an issue is explicitly mentioned, then assume it isn't or wasn't considered... Not as an oversight, but because it did not exist. Flaxman was in 1977, the amendment adding the 7 and 10 year provisions was enacted in 1998... Which would only leave Behjat and Huffman, both of which were year 2000 cases; the court did not indicate the age of a survey in neither of those cases. Then there were Cooper and Lowe which were a 2002 cases, Cooper tried to fake the appellate by claiming speed trap existed but as it turned out he was paced, Lowe simply appealed by discrediting the officer's speedometer accuracy. No E&T survey was required for either.

All are good questions, but lets assume that the court will find much of the officer's evidence as valid, how will you overcome being 31mph over the limit? THAT, is the real question!