OK... Much better!
C for "Weather" means Clear
D for "Roadway" means Dry
W this spot/entry is typically used to describe "Traffic" as in light, medium or heavy... I am not sure how a "W" would fit in!
Otherwise known as a "center lane" or a "turning lane"!
It never says "this is a turning lane"!
Well, there you go...
Basic Speed Law 22350.
No person shall drive a vehicle upon a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable or prudent having due regard for weather, visibility, the traffic on, and the surface and width of, the highway, and in no event at a speed which endangers the safety of persons or property.
That other driver is the person you endangered, and his vehicle (and presumably any of those homes there) are the property you endangered!
Of course that will get you nowhere! Your estimate of the other driver's speed is probably a bit conservative.. Even if it is close, you are not allowed a pass there and certainly, not at a high rate of speed. These violations aren't necessarily related by any means, but the do have one thing in common (which I will briefly address below*). With that said, nobody passes at 30-35... Seriously, I realize you're trying a conservative approach but your testimony will mean very little. In fact, more often than not, you'd be well advised NOT to testify!
Just a guess but, you'll lose that one... With, or without the markings, that center lane could not under any circumstances be mistaken for a passing lane!
But really, if you look at the markings, you'll see that the outside line has a continuous set of dots for the entire length (to simulate the solid yellow). Whereas the inside lines have 3 or 4 dots on, 3 or 4 off (to simulate the dashed yellow)...
Add to it the fact that you stated you were on your way home, how likely is it that you take this route fairly frequently? It doesn't mean much but it does mean you're familiar with the road. And mistakes like that... well, shouldn't happen!
If by the exchange you mean your conversation with the officer, then yes, depending on what was said, he is likely to repeat it verbatim, and it will likely hurt you. And yes, for this, I can see a need to request discovery. Of course there is no guarantee you'll get much but you can try.
Aaah, yes... You can assume that story is even remotely true, you can build your hopes around it, and walk into court confident the judge will bend and gush when he hears it. I'm not buying it will work! (I mean, HELL, he could have said "A couple of days later"... Instead, "The following day, in my mail, I received a written, 'Not Guilty.'".
I really wish Geo would have toned down on the level of optimism. Simply because it does no one no good! (Well, except for him, in that it drives traffic to his website, and he can sit there counting pennies/click).
Well, even if this was not a school zone the first question would still remain: "what would be the posted limit?"
A WILD guess.... Not much higher than 25mph (it appears to be residential with bike lanes)...
And by the way, you have more than just one school, you have Monte Vista High School, you have Lincoln Elementary and you have a YMCA daycare center!
In fact, let me go back to the residential issue, a residence district is defined under VC 515
515. A "residence district" is that portion of a highway and the property contiguous thereto, other than a business district, (a) upon one side of which highway, within a distance of a quarter of a mile, the contiguous property fronting thereon is occupied by 13 or more separate dwelling houses or business structures, or (b) upon both sides of which highway, collectively, within a distance of a quarter of a mile, the contiguous property fronting thereon is occupied by 16 or more separate dwelling houses or business structures. A residence district may be longer than one-quarter of a mile if the above ratio of separate dwelling houses or business structures to the length of the highway exists.
I measure a 1/4 mile from "A" to "B" happenes to be approximately 1320 feet, and you can skip the school on the south side... Counting residences: And we are at EXACTLY 13. Excluding the one on the corner of McClellan Rd. And Byrne Ave. because it fronts on Byrne Ave.
And the second question then is:
"Is it safe to drive at approximately 20mph above the limit"?
The answer is "unequivocally NO"!
None of which is justification of a hope for acquittal! The mere fact that you committed the crime(s) is indicative of your willingness to pay the fine! And you would be geting off scott free in comparison to an accident with/without injury!
You will likely have to post bail whether you want to or not.
I think you should be a little more conservative with what you're hoping for. This is my own personal opinion but * (and here is how they are related) I see this one as you being one minor glitch from a reckless driving charge. Not likely to happen at this point in time but you can bet that an articulate officer could have been creative enough to make one happen. Each of these violations, and by its description here is independently egregious enough -under the circumstances- to drive the judge mad, combine them together, and you've got one pissed off judge. Now, I'm not saying you should count on losing, but for you to go in sounding so adamant about being "not guilty", you sound way too confident for your own good.
You'll get other opinions but in the meantime, contact public works in that city and request a copy of the most recent copy of the Engineering and Traffic survey for that stretch of roadway. It still remains a question as to whether the officer;'s estimate would negate the presumption of a speed trap and the requirement to prove one was not maintained, or if it is not required under those circumstances. When you get the survey, upload it to an image hosting site, and post links for us to see it! Until then, there is very little that can be said.