I attended traffic court today in Kern County with a friend. He received a 22350 ticket on a 4 lane highway with a 35mph speed limit. Basic facts were:
-lidar used, clocked defendant at 50mph
-speed survey was conducted in 2001
-critical speed on the survey was 55mph
So, court began and the cop gave his side of the story which was brief.
-Defendant moved for dismissal because the prosecution had not met the statutory requirement of proving a speed trap didn't exist. Judge denied motion.
-Defendant demanded to see a copy of the speed survey. Cop produced a copy of the survey. Defendant objected as survey was not an original or certified copy as required by People v. Earnest. Judge said, "I don't care about that, move on".
-Defendant argued the survey was expired as it was conducted in 2001 and the survey must be CONDUCTED within the past 5 years. Judge said, "it's ok... they usually just stamp it when it expires".
-Defendant argued that the speed limit was not justified and therefore a speed trap existed. Cop read from the "observed pace" line and reported to the court that the critical speed was "40 - 54mph". Defendant argued that was not correct. The judge claimed that the officer had been trained in reading surveys and asked the officer if he believed the survey to be valid. The officer said "yes". The judge said, "that's good enough for me" and didn't even look at the survey.
The defendant was found guilty.
This is a case that personifies why I have been so adamant about people zealously defending themselves in court. This was an egregious example of a pinhead cop who doesn't understand the slightest thing about speed surveys and a blind judge who had his mind made up before the trial started. What a horrible miscarriage of justice.
Defendant will be appealing. I'll keep this forum apprised of status if there is any interest.

