Error on Ticket 22349 (A)

[abpsychology]

My question involves a speeding ticket from the State of: California

Hi Everyone,

I got a ticket for Max speed limit violation 22349 (a) on a 50 mph zone, The thing is that the ticket states that

I was going approx 68 on a P.F./ Max 65 the veh.lmt. 65 safe 65 radar yes distance 100 yds. They are fining me $226 for the violation.


since I know I was going 18 mph over the limit not 3 miles as stated by the ticket, do you guys now if they are charging me with 3 mph or 18 mph over the limit?? If they are charging me with 3 mph should I fight the ticket or is there a way they can actually go back and check that the safe speed in that road was 50 mph and change the fine?

Thanks for your help, and I'm glad I found this Forum!!!

Aldo

[abpsychology]

BTW I forgot to say that I was cited by a local police officer on a 3 line Pkwy not a Highway patrol maybe this makes a difference in them noticing the error in the infraction.

Thanks again!!!

Aldo

[EWYLTJ]

You are being charged with 3 mph over. That is an absurd charge. The answer to your question is: hell yes you should go in and fight it.

[chuckycheese]

How? By going to court and saying you were only exceeding the speed limit by 3 MPH?? You need to get a grip on reality.

In California, that means you were speeding...which means you're guilty....which means you pay the prescribed fine....and there is no such thing as a reduction.

[EWYLTJ]

How? By going to court and saying you were only exceeding the speed limit by 3 MPH?? You need to get a grip on reality.

In California, that means you were speeding...which means you're guilty....which means you pay the prescribed fine....and there is no such thing as a reduction.

In the United States, there is a presumption of innocence until proven guilty... and you have the right to defend yourself in court. No one said anything about a reduction.


Aldo,

The first thing you should do is a trial by written declaration. Simply state that you are being charged with speeding 3 mph over and you are not guilty. There is a possibility the judge may dismiss it at that point. If not, you need to immediately request a Trial de Novo. Then, go to the court and get a copy of the officer's statement from the TBWD. You'll have a good idea then of what he'll say in court.

When you show up for the Trial de Novo, make sure the cop crosses every T and dots every I. Ask to see copies of the calibration and maintenance records for the radar. Everything must be current. Also, ask to see copies of the radar training school he attended. He should have these documents in court. Furthermore, if he has them, they MUST be originals or certified true copies. If they are not, you should object to them being admitted as evidence and ask for a dismissal.

Also... here is an interesting twist. You should try this to see what happens (it can't hurt). Before the cop testifies at your trial, you should ask for dismissal as the prosecution (who won't be there) hasn't established a speed trap did not exist as per VC40803(b):

40803(b) In any prosecution under this code of a charge involving the
speed of a vehicle, where enforcement involves the use of radar or
other electronic devices which measure the speed of moving objects,
the prosecution shall establish, as part of its prima facie case,
that the evidence or testimony presented is not based upon a
speedtrap as defined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section
40802.

The cop is a witness, nothing more and nothing less. Therefore he cannot establish a prima facie case nor can he perform an act of prosecution.

The judge is likely to quote case law that says the absence of a prosecutor does not inherently deprive you of a fair trial... to which you can argue that you are not talking about a fair trial, you are arguing about a statutory requirement of the prosecution which they have failed to perform.

It probably won't work, but it is certainly worth a try. I would pull the stops out on this BS charge. If you are convicted at your Trial de Novo, I'd start the appeal process based on the issue above.