California 22349a with Lidar, 67 in a 45

[videotape]

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

This happened back in July when I was cited by a motorcycle cop for doing 67 in a 45. This was eastbound on Montague Expwy, a four lane expressway in Santa Clara. The location is a known speed trap where the cops often hide on motorcycles. I should have been careful :-)

He said he got me on LIDAR and offered me to see his readings. I refused to see the LIDAR and just got the ticket without admitting any guilt (except for acknowledging the posted speed limit of 45mph)

When I got the courtesy notice, it was a whopping $408. Based on the valuable knowledge from this forum, I have requested a one month extension and prepared a IDR to the Santa Clara DA (cc: Superior Court in Santa Clara.)

My understanding is that I am being charged for 67 in a 65 mph highway, so basically 2mph over. Is this correct?

What would be the best defense strategy in this case? Could I argue 2mph within the range of LIDAR error margin? There were some cars close to me going the same direction. Would it make sense to argue he got the wrong guy based on info from the IDR?

Thanks in advance!

[That Guy]

My understanding is that I am being charged for 67 in a 65 mph highway, so basically 2mph over. Is this correct?

Earlier in your post, you stated "67 in 45" and "acknowledging the posted speed limit of 45mph"... So you're being charged with 67 in 45.

Also, if you were charged with 67 in 65 then your fine would have been $201 or thereabouts... From what I can see, the fine for speeding ~67 in 45 or 22mph over the limit~ should be around $321. Are you sure the $408 you quoted doesn't include the traffic school fee? And have you had any other speeding tickets recently?

What CVC section were you cited for?

[videotape]

Earlier in your post, you stated "67 in 45" and "acknowledging the posted speed limit of 45mph"... So you're being charged with 67 in 45.

Also, if you were charged with 67 in 65 then your fine would have been $201 or thereabouts... From what I can see, the fine for speeding ~67 in 45 or 22mph over the limit~ should be around $321. Are you sure the $408 you quoted doesn't include the traffic school fee? And have you had any other speeding tickets recently?

What CVC section were you cited for?

I am charged under VC 22349(a). The $408 is without the traffic school.

What would be the best strategy to contest this?

[That Guy]

What was the speed limit where you were cited?

What speed limit did the officer write on the citation?

And have you had any other speeding violation recently?

[videotape]

What was the speed limit where you were cited?

What speed limit did the officer write on the citation?

And have you had any other speeding violation recently?

Posted speed limit 45 on a four lane expressway. I was cited for 67. My last speeding violation was over 18 months ago.

[videotape]

I had my day in court today!

The Judge was very nice and generally accommodating.

The officer presented his lidar calibration records. I objected to the records as hearsay since the document was not certified. My objection was accepted and the lidar certificate was not admitted as evidence.

In closing I told the judge that:

1. The prosecution has not met the burden of proof by providing a lidar certification that is not original/certified true copy. For all we know, the lidar could not be working at all.

2. The officer as part of his testimony has accepted using the prima facie speed limit (45mph) while enforcing the max speed law. As per People vs Singh, his testimony cannot be accepted unless a valid speed survey is produced.

3. The officer has mentioned his accuracy is +-5mph in speed estimation. This is well within the margin of error since I was allegedly going 67 which is only 2mph over the max speed.

The judge refused to accept #2 and #3 as valid arguments. On #1 she said she is not sure and has taken my case under advisement. I will get a decision in the mail.

What should i expect now? Will it be worthwhile to appeal if she finds me guilty?

Thanks for all the help on these forums.

[EWYLTJ]

First of all, I think you did a great job. I think you have a problem with defense #1 in that nothing requires the officer to produce the calibration records in the first place. However, he did introduce the records, so that calls into question the maintenance of the lidar. I agree that defense #2 is a loser... but it was worth a shot. However, you did a good job with #3 because if the lack of calibration records discredits the lidar, the court can't rely on visual estimation.

I'd bet you are going to get an dismissal because the judge won't want to deal with an appeal.

[That Guy]

GREAT job indeed... Keep us updated and good luck!