Entering an Intersection on Yellow to Turn Left

[amespeed]

My question involves a traffic ticket from the state of: Oregon

So, I've been doing research on this particular issue and I can't seem to find any clear answers that will help me figure out this case. Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

I'm driving home at about 10:30 at night in Eugene, Lane County, Oregon. I approach a round green signal to turn left from a two way street onto a one-way street (using appropriate signaling and turning into the correct lane). Just as I'm about to enter the intersection, the light turns yellow but I was too close to stop before the crosswalk. So, I enter the intersection as the other car drives through the yellow light. The car goes by, and I finish my turn and vacate the intersection on what was probably a red light, although I didn't see. I then crossed two lanes to turn right on the next street, and after having made that turn was pulled over by an officer.

He says that I ran a red light and changed lanes too quickly. I asked for clarification regarding changing lanes because I didn't understand what the issue was, and he said I didn't signal for long enough before changing both lanes and it appeared that I wasn't looking where I was going. I didn't say anything or ask about the supposed red-light running. After taking my info for about five or ten minutes, he ended up giving me a warning regarding the lane changing, but wrote me up for "fail obey traffic cont dev (stoplight)" under rule "811.165." The guy was fairly nice and after explaining the regulations around lane-changing signals, he told me I could look into getting my fine reduced at the violations bureau.

First of all, I'm unclear regarding the legality of entering the intersection: I was under the impression that I should stop at the crosswalk for a yellow light as long as it is possible and safe for me to do so, but since it was neither, I was in my right to enter the intersection and then vacate it. Secondly, his description of the event both in words and on the ticket does not match the rule number he wrote down (811.165 discusses failure to stop for public transit vehicles, he probably meant 811.265 which discusses failure to obey a traffic control device), which seems like an inconsistency which may help me out.

So, in summation:

1) I am under the impression that my maneuver in the intersection was legal, although it could probably be easily argued that it was not;

2) The rule number he wrote down does not match the violation he described, and I'm wondering if that will lend me any help in the case;

3) He did also say that I had failed to signal properly changing lanes (which I believe I actually AM guilty of) but he didn't actually write me up on it, and I'm afraid that will work against me if I pleaded not-guilty.

So any advice would be appreciated. Should I contest it in court? I'm 18, have a clean record so far after almost two years of having a license. I have the option of going to the violations bureau to have the fine reduced from $300 to $175, but that's still way more than I can reasonably afford. Is there anything I can do? Thanks in advance.

[flyingron]

Oregon law differs from many other states in that it mandates a stop at a yellow light unless a driver can not do so safely. If you were stopped (or could do so safety), it's illegal to enter the intersection on the yellow.

As for the citation, clerical errors on the ticket itself are largely immaterial. You will be informed of the proper charge at trial.

[amespeed]

Right, and that's my argument. I was so close to the crosswalk when the light turned yellow that stopping would have been unsafe and I would guess, with my old car, impossible. Basically, I was already decelerating so that I would stop mid-intersection and allow for the other car to pass so that I could turn. Slowing any faster might have resulted in a skid, which might have sent me right into that oncoming car, which would have obviously been bad. So, I choose to continue my path of deceleration through the yellow light for safety's sake.

Of course this is just a case of he-said-she-said, which I was hoping might be helped by the fact that I was a prime target for DUI checks (young adult male driving by himself late on a Friday night) and that he was not entirely focused, as is evidenced by the fact that he wrote down the wrong violation on the ticket. But maybe I'm just fooling myself hoping to get this solved.

[That Guy]

Right, and that's my argument. I was so close to the crosswalk when the light turned yellow that stopping would have been unsafe and I would guess, with my old car, impossible.

Old car, new car or anywhere in between, brakes and your ability to stop should function 100% perfectly 100% of the time. So I wouldn't mention anything remotely similar.

Basically, I was already decelerating so that I would stop mid-intersection and allow for the other car to pass so that I could turn.

And if you approached entry into the intersection and or the brief stop at a speed that is higher than 5mph or so, then you were going too fast. I mean you intended on stoipping and waiting until the car passed it would then follow that a sudden stop from 5mph is not likely to carry enough momentum to cause any skid, not even on a wet surface. You can exaggerated it any which way you'd like, the presumption is if the officer surmised that a stop before entry into the intersection (whether it be based upon the approach speed OR distance from the limit line/crosswalk) was not possible, then it would be safe to assume that he would have not issued a citation... Or at least that is I am assuming the court will assume under these circumstances.

Whether he was focused or not and the reliability of his testimony is a matter for the trier of fact to decide. You certainly can infer that the officer was not paying attention, but there are quite a few indications that he witnessed an 811.265, he described the same on the citation, he discussed the same with you... As to him writing a 1 instead of a 2, it could have been an approaching vehicle, he looked up for a second, it could be someone honked, he heard screeching tires, heck, maybe he sneezed. This "error" will end up being considered what is commonly referred to as "harmless error" simply because it had zero impact upon your ability to defend yourself...

Not my place to suggest that you should give up, or not fight, or not exercise your right to having the state prove its case, but keep in mind that you could have been in for two violations, instead of 1. So no matter how you look at it, you've already gotten a break! We all know what happens to greedy people.

You may have been correct about the DUI matter, but I'm not really sure if it adds or takes away from either of the violations you allegedly committed.

[amespeed]

Old car, new car or anywhere in between, brakes and your ability to stop should function 100% perfectly 100% of the time. So I wouldn't mention anything remotely similar.



And if you approached entry into the intersection and or the brief stop at a speed that is higher than 5mph or so, then you were going too fast. I mean you intended on stoipping and waiting until the car passed it would then follow that a sudden stop from 5mph is not likely to carry enough momentum to cause any skid, not even on a wet surface. You can exaggerated it any which way you'd like, the presumption is if the officer surmised that a stop before entry into the intersection (whether it be based upon the approach speed OR distance from the limit line/crosswalk) was not possible, then it would be safe to assume that he would have not issued a citation... Or at least that is I am assuming the court will assume under these circumstances.

Whether he was focused or not and the reliability of his testimony is a matter for the trier of fact to decide. You certainly can infer that the officer was not paying attention, but there are quite a few indications that he witnessed an 811.265, he described the same on the citation, he discussed the same with you... As to him writing a 1 instead of a 2, it could have been an approaching vehicle, he looked up for a second, it could be someone honked, he heard screeching tires, heck, maybe he sneezed. This "error" will end up being considered what is commonly referred to as "harmless error" simply because it had zero impact upon your ability to defend yourself...

Not my place to suggest that you should give up, or not fight, or not exercise your right to having the state prove its case, but keep in mind that you could have been in for two violations, instead of 1. So no matter how you look at it, you've already gotten a break! We all know what happens to greedy people.

You may have been correct about the DUI matter, but I'm not really sure if it adds or takes away from either of the violations you allegedly committed.

I'm not sure how entering an intersection at more than 5mph is dangerous... that's crawling speed, the kind of thing you do after you've already stopped and are creeping forward to turn. I mean obviously any speculation regarding skidding or whatever is just that, speculation. But the fact of the matter is that I was less than 5 feet from the crosswalk (if that) at the moment the light turned yellow, and I was already slowing at a normal-to-fast braking pace for a target 10 to 15 feet PAST the crosswalk. Stopping within that timeframe was simply not plausible, and since I was already decelerating and signaling, it would have been reckless and illegal to go straight through the intersection. So, I did the only real remaining option, which was to complete my turn as the light turned red.

I mean, I guess it comes down to the legality of approaching the intersection. I was under the impression that as long as the light is green, I could enter the intersection at any speed up to 25mph. Whether or not my approaching speed was appropriate or not isn't really an issue, because I was cited for failing to obey the traffic light, even though I did. I'm just frustrated because of all the things he might have more reasonably cited me for, I was cited for the most expensive violation and the one which I was really least likely to have committed. If he'd cited me for changing lanes too quickly or something I'd suck it up, but I did NOT illegally run a red light and it's more than three times the cost of a dangerous lane change. I don't want to settle for being acquitted of a minor violation in favor of a worse one.

Now again, I'm aware that my case is less than solid. Basically, I just want to know what my best bet would be. Should I try a trial by affidavit? I've read that if you are not pardoned through that, you can then request a normal trial, but I'm not sure if that's true. What I'm MOST concerned about is this tarnishing my record. I performed two maneuvers which are definitely in the grey area legally, but are hardly clear violations (like speeding). I'm not a reckless driver, and I'm pretty sure had I been a different demographic the cop wouldn't have bothered to pull me over (which is beside the point perhaps, but I'm just justifying my desire to fight this). A dirty record is a terrible thing to have, and we don't have traffic school here, so as far as I know the only way to clear it is to get the whole violation dismissed.

[That Guy]

I'm not sure how entering an intersection at more than 5mph is dangerous...

Where did I say the you entering the intersection at more than 5mph is dangerous?

... that's crawling speed, the kind of thing you do after you've already stopped and are creeping forward to turn.

That is what you were doing, was it not? Yielding the right of way to opposing traffic? Are you suggesting you enter the intersection at normal speed (15 -25 in a 25mph zone) slam on your breaks (no wonder you were concerned about skidding into the other car) and start to creep forward as you wait for an opening?

But the fact of the matter is that I was less than 5 feet from the crosswalk (if that) at the moment the light turned yellow, and I was already slowing at a normal-to-fast braking pace for a target 10 to 15 feet PAST the crosswalk. Stopping within that timeframe was simply not plausible, and since I was already decelerating and signaling, it would have been reckless and illegal to go straight through the intersection. So, I did the only real remaining option, which was to complete my turn as the light turned red.

You're free to jump from one extreme to another (the reckless part), or to presume that the officer will testify exactly the way you want him to (regarding the 5 feet away)... Again, the fact that he issued you a citation for failing to stop subsequent to the light changing to yellow, is NOT because he expected you to recklessly proceed through the intersection, NOT because you were only 5 feet away from the limit line and there was absolutely no way you could have stopped; he cited you simply because in his opinion, you were at a distance or speed (or both) where you should have been able to stop "safely" as required by the code, and yet you didn't!

Whether or not my approaching speed was appropriate or not isn't really an issue, because I was cited for failing to obey the traffic light, even though I did.

Your speed, and although not an element of the offense, it in combination with the distance you were away from the limit line dictates the "safe" element of your ability to stop. SO yes, it DOES indirectly affect your action and therefore it does affect the validity of a presumption of guilt or innocence.

I'm just frustrated because of all the things he might have more reasonably cited me for, I was cited for the most expensive violation and the one which I was really least likely to have committed. If he'd cited me for changing lanes too quickly or something I'd suck it up, but I did NOT illegally run a red light and it's more than three times the cost of a dangerous lane change. I don't want to settle for being acquitted of a minor violation in favor of a worse one.

Your guilt or innocence is not dependent upon the penalty. In fact the penalty phase of any criminal prosecution comes after a finding of guilt. So that is not how yor case will be tried. Therefore, it is my opinion that you run a greater risk of losing by having to force the issues simply because this one is more expensive.

Now again, I'm aware that my case is less than solid. Basically, I just want to know what my best bet would be. Should I try a trial by affidavit? I've read that if you are not pardoned through that, you can then request a normal trial, but I'm not sure if that's true.

You'll have to check with the court clerk regarding those questions.

What I'm MOST concerned about is this tarnishing my record. I performed two maneuvers which are definitely in the grey area legally, but are hardly clear violations (like speeding). I'm not a reckless driver, and I'm pretty sure had I been a different demographic the cop wouldn't have bothered to pull me over (which is beside the point perhaps, but I'm just justifying my desire to fight this). A dirty record is a terrible thing to have, and we don't have traffic school here, so as far as I know the only way to clear it is to get the whole violation dismissed.

These are clear and valid traffic citations. A finding of guilt will obviously be reflected upon your record, as it should... If it is that mportant to you to get this one dismissed, you might want to consult with an attorney. My guess is thus far, your chances of prevailing are fairly slim.

Good luck either way...

[amespeed]

Where did I say the you entering the intersection at more than 5mph is dangerous?



That is what you were doing, was it not? Yielding the right of way to opposing traffic? Are you suggesting you enter the intersection at normal speed (15 -25 in a 25mph zone) slam on your breaks (no wonder you were concerned about skidding into the other car) and start to creep forward as you wait for an opening?



You're free to jump from one extreme to another (the reckless part), or to presume that the officer will testify exactly the way you want him to (regarding the 5 feet away)... Again, the fact that he issued you a citation for failing to stop subsequent to the light changing to yellow, is NOT because he expected you to recklessly proceed through the intersection, NOT because you were only 5 feet away from the limit line and there was absolutely no way you could have stopped; he cited you simply because in his opinion, you were at a distance or speed (or both) where you should have been able to stop "safely" as required by the code, and yet you didn't!



Your speed, and although not an element of the offense, it in combination with the distance you were away from the limit line dictates the "safe" element of your ability to stop. SO yes, it DOES indirectly affect your action and therefore it does affect the validity of a presumption of guilt or innocence.



Your guilt or innocence is not dependent upon the penalty. In fact the penalty phase of any criminal prosecution comes after a finding of guilt. So that is not how yor case will be tried. Therefore, it is my opinion that you run a greater risk of losing by having to force the issues simply because this one is more expensive.



You'll have to check with the court clerk regarding those questions.




These are clear and valid traffic citations. A finding of guilt will obviously be reflected upon your record, as it should... If it is that mportant to you to get this one dismissed, you might want to consult with an attorney. My guess is thus far, your chances of prevailing are fairly slim.

Good luck either way...

Well thanks for your input. It gives me an idea of the way a totally unsympathetic court would harshly deconstruct any argument I tried to make. I guess I'll just suck up the unfair citation, get the fine reduced and cancel my insurance, I suppose I don't need to drive anywhere particular if I'm on a campus most of the time... hopefully any premiums will have gone down in four years. If anyone would actually be willing to give me advice on what best course of action to take at this point, that would also be appreciated.

[That Guy]

Well thanks for your input. It gives me an idea of the way a totally unsympathetic court would harshly deconstruct any argument I tried to make. I guess I'll just suck up the unfair citation, get the fine reduced and cancel my insurance, I suppose I don't need to drive anywhere particular if I'm on a campus most of the time... hopefully any premiums will have gone down in four years.

Once again, you've resorted to jumping from one extreme (expecting the court to bend over and allow you a penalty free pass simply because you asked).... to the other extreme of not driving for 4 years, and you losing because this happens to be a harsh totally unfair court.

You're right about one thing though; the citation *IS* unfair but only because you should have been cited for BOTH violations. You are wrong about everything else you've stated including but not limited to your somehow believing that you have the option of maintaining a clean driving record in spite of the fact that you've committed several violations.

If anyone would actually be willing to give me advice on what best course of action to take at this point, that would also be appreciated.

Yeah, here is some REAL advice for you: GROW UP, get over yourself and understand that to adults, ACTIONS HAVE CONSEQUENCES. There comes a time in life where there are no do overs.

[jeep2007]

Did anyone lose an asshole? Because I found one:

That Guy (or is it That Dick)


What a sorry ass POS he is. It seems like every law message board has an egotistical gate keeper whose worthless life would be over if the internet ceased to exist. He probably still hasn't come to grips with the fact that Matlock got cancelled. He reminds me of an old SNL character "Nick Burns - The Computer Guy". The only difference is that Nick Burns actually helps people in the end.

I'll probably get banned for this post but who cares. People come on here asking for HELP not to be belittled, berated, or arm-chair quarterbacked. There are some very good volunteers who are helpful but if you have to put up people like That Guy (aka I_Got_Banned at another site) it's not worth the time. My advice is to "PM" the people who you think can help you.

So even though I'll probably get banned it's actually That Guy who should get banned. The one thing That Guy has done perfectly is to lay the foundation for being called a complete IDIOT!

[That Guy]

.

Isn't it mind blowing how hatred spreads and multiplies? If it was a compliment or a good word that someone said, all of you pathetic spineless cowardly imbeciles would run and hide!

Did anyone lose an asshole? Because I found one:

That Guy (or is it That Dick)


What a sorry ass POS he is. It seems like every law message board has an egotistical gate keeper whose worthless life would be over if the internet ceased to exist. He probably still hasn't come to grips with the fact that Matlock got cancelled. He reminds me of an old SNL character "Nick Burns - The Computer Guy". The only difference is that Nick Burns actually helps people in the end.

I'll probably get banned for this post but who cares. People come on here asking for HELP not to be belittled, berated, or arm-chair quarterbacked. There are some very good volunteers who are helpful but if you have to put up people like That Guy (aka I_Got_Banned at another site) it's not worth the time. My advice is to "PM" the people who you think can help you.

So even though I'll probably get banned it's actually That Guy who should get banned. The one thing That Guy has done perfectly is to lay the foundation for being called a complete IDIOT!

You're a sorry ass scum-bag, who obviously couldn't handle the reality of the answer you were given in your own thread, so you hold it in for 10 or so days, and you come back for redemption. Is that what this is all about? Clearly, you are a mid 40s possibly early 50s moron who lives his life through the fantasy of T.V. characters, you copy ideas for a defense from other threads and even though it is clear that those defenses do not apply to your case, you simply lack the mental capacity to try and justify your position, you could not simply attempt to discuss a legitimate answer you were given, you find it plausible to post your deplorable ramble crap to those who are in a similar situation as you are. Have I got this right so far? If so, rest assured I am not offended by your little trick. I would actually be quite flattered that my post and opinion stirred up a response... But to respond in the creepy manner you did... That's a different story!

What does concern me though is this, not only did you chase me down from another forum, you did so from a forum where, with the exception of one or two posts a few weeks prior to your post, I had not posted there in over a year (BTW, you're the 2nd person to mention that forum on here (as if I'm hiding out here or something) or maybe you're one and the same). And then you made it a point to search this forum for two threads where other pathetic souls were dissatisfied with my posts (this thread is one, and here is the other one: Re: Jailed Over an Unpaid Speeding Ticket) . And yet you still posted nothing in your own thread as a response. Courtesy Notice Cites Different Statute Subsection Than Traffic Ticket Instead, you simply deleted the useless photos you had previously posted... But wait, you couldn't delete your IP address though, could you? This makes you a stalker... And a creepy one at that! But one who is much bigger of an idiot than I could ever be!

And ban you? From this forum? Why would anyone ban you??? There are only a limited number of people that you must not offend. And you can rest assured I am not one of them. And more importantly, the fact that you're a bigger idiot than I could ever be, the fact that you are mentally and intellectually challenged, makes you a fixture and a distraction that is welcome on this forum. Perfect example of that, look at your buddy the forum joker, A.K.A. losthismind; clearly, there really is no benefit in keeping him around. Not one single post that is useful to anyone, not now, not ever... And he's spewed enough crap about me to equal his weight in cow pies (dry, not wet); yet he's still around, he's still posting crap because that all he knows how to do, and nobody's banned him simply because nobody cares what he does. And nobody's gonna chase him to bum-**** Iowa to file a complaint against him! He'll find his match someday... I have no doubt. With that said, and while he thinks I hate him, I don't? I feel sorry for him but mostly for his family! You would make for a different story though. It'll be much easier to get you for stalking and harassment! So consider this as your warning to stop being an idiot. Every step you take from here will count against you. I'll leave it at that!