Clocked at 5 mph Over

[PAcitizen]

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

Hello, I received a speeding ticket yesterday under title 75, section 3362, subsection A2.

From the ticket:

actual speed: 60 mph
allowed speed: 55mph
timing device: clocked
miles followed: 2.00MI
miles timed: 1.00MI
secs timed: blank
special activity: none
speed detection type: blank
date equip tested: 02/15/2010
nature of offense: speeding. 65/55 mph passing a marked patrol unit.

The officer walks over loud and rude "it never ceases to amaze me people like you". Meanwhile I have the windows opened, hands on the steering wheel showing I am not a threat. I retained my 5th amendment rights which is what set him off apparently as he just lectured me about how stupid I was for passing him in a marked car, and you don't pass cops.. blah blah blah, then accused me of being intoxicated (because I ignored him as he was talking to me), then eventually I opened my mouth as it was getting ridiculous and asked if I was being detained and he asked for my papers at that point and got even more upset with me.

Normally I wouldn't bother with a 5MPH fine but I have two witness's and they both agreed he was out of line, and my GPS showed me going 55 the entire time (which BTW he only followed me for less than 1/4 mile), Anyways, I read up a bit and it looks like if he did in fact clock me, then it was past the 60 days required for inspection of his device, whatever it was. And if it was radar then below the minimum speed of 6mph over the limit. In either situation, it looks like I can get this dismissed.

Because he was so nasty, I am going to plead not guilty, and would like to request discovery but am having trouble reading about how to do that in PA exactly as from what I've read, there is no prosecutor, just the PO himself so I would send this request to him via certified mail? I want to ask for all the notes, records, logs, of the traffic stop, the operators manual for the speed detection equipment, police dept regulations regarding the use policies and operation of the equipment, and a few other things. I figure if discovery doesn't work, I could do it under the freedom of information act, or Pennsylvania's right-to-know laws.

So what do you think? Anything I am missing?

[That Guy]

Anything I am missing?

I am not too versed in PA's traffic laws but I'll still point out a few hurdles you might face (based on how “I” am interpreting the related statute(s)). Here is section:

§ 3368. Speed timing devices

(a) Speedometers authorized.--The rate of speed of any vehicle may be timed on any highway by a police officer using a motor vehicle equipped with a speedometer. In ascertaining the speed of a vehicle by the use of a speedometer, the speed shall be timed for a distance of not less than three-tenths of a mile.

(b) Testing of speedometers.--The department may appoint stations for testing speedometers and may prescribe regulations as to the manner in which the test shall be made. Speedometers shall have been tested for accuracy within a period of one year prior to the alleged violation and immediately upon change of tire size. A certificate from the station showing that the test was made, the date of the test and the degree of accuracy of the speedometer shall be competent and prima facie evidence of those facts in every proceeding in which a violation of this title is charged.

(c) Mechanical, electrical and electronic devices authorized.--

(1) Except as otherwise provided in this section, the rate of speed of any vehicle may be timed on any highway by a police officer using a mechanical or electrical speed timing device.
(2) Except as otherwise provided in paragraph (3), electronic devices such as radio-microwave devices (commonly referred to as electronic speed meters or radar) may be used only by members of the Pennsylvania State Police.
(3) Electronic devices which calculate speed by measuring elapsed time between measured road surface points by using two sensors and devices which measure and calculate the average speed of a vehicle between any two points may be used by any police officer.
(4) No person may be convicted upon evidence obtained through the use of devices authorized by paragraphs (2) and (3) unless the speed recorded is six or more miles per hour in excess of the legal speed limit. Furthermore, no person may be convicted upon evidence obtained through the use of devices authorized by paragraph (3) in an area where the legal speed limit is less than 55 miles per hour if the speed recorded is less than ten miles per hour in excess of the legal speed limit. This paragraph shall not apply to evidence obtained through the use of devices authorized by paragraph (2) or (3) within a school zone or an active work zone.

(d) Classification, approval and testing of mechanical, electrical and electronic devices.--The department may, by regulation, classify specific devices as being mechanical, electrical or electronic. All mechanical, electrical or electronic devices shall be of a type approved by the department, which shall appoint stations for calibrating and testing the devices and may prescribe regulations as to the manner in which calibrations and tests shall be made. The certification and calibration of electronic devices under subsection (c)(3) shall also include the certification and calibration of all equipment, timing strips and other devices which are actually used with the particular electronic device being certified and calibrated. Electronic devices commonly referred to as electronic speed meters or radar shall have been tested for accuracy within a period of one year prior to the alleged violation. Other devices shall have been tested for accuracy within a period of 60 days prior to the alleged violation. A certificate from the station showing that the calibration and test were made within the required period and that the device was accurate shall be competent and prima facie evidence of those facts in every proceeding in which a violation of this title is charged.

(e) Distance requirements for use of mechanical, electrical and electronic devices.--Mechanical, electrical or electronic devices may not be used to time the rate of speed of vehicles within 500 feet after a speed limit sign indicating a decrease of speed. This limitation on the use of speed timing devices shall not apply to speed limit signs indicating school zones, bridge and elevated structure speed limits, hazardous grade speed limits and work zone speed limits.

It is safe to assume that "clocked" could also mean "paced" (using a speedometer). At least that is how I am interpreting this:

actual speed: 60 mph
allowed speed: 55mph
timing device: clocked
miles followed: 2.00MI
miles timed: 1.00MI
secs timed: blank
special activity: none
speed detection type: blank
date equip tested: 02/15/2010
nature of offense: speeding. 65/55 mph passing a marked patrol unit.

If that is the case, then the "under 6mph in a 55mph+ zone = no conviction" -Subsection 3368(c)(4)- wherein it states:

No person may be convicted upon evidence obtained through the use of devices authorized by paragraphs (2) and (3) unless the speed recorded is six or more miles per hour in excess of the legal speed limit.

... may not apply!

Why not?

Because that only applies to "...evidence obtained through the use of devices authorized by paragraphs (2) and (3)...". And paragraphs (2) and (3) do not cover "speedometers". "Speedometers", and the requirements for their use, are covered in subsection (a) and (b).

Furthermore, and with regards to calibration...The 60 day calibration requirement you referred to, does not apply to "speedometers"... Subsection 3368(b) speaks to the speedometer calibration requirement and sets it at "one year"

§ 3368. Speed timing devices

(b) Testing of speedometers.--

The department may appoint stations for testing speedometers and may prescribe regulations as to the manner in which the test shall be made. Speedometers shall have been tested for accuracy within a period of one year prior to the alleged violation and immediately upon change of tire size. A certificate from the station showing that the test was made, the date of the test and the degree of accuracy of the speedometer shall be competent and prima facie evidence of those facts in every proceeding in which a violation of this title is charged.

You're free to request/file for discovery and request all of what you listed in your post... Although I think you're going for overkill by asking for all that. I say that because, in my view, your case hinges on one fact...

• If he paced you you're pretty much SOL and none of the documents you plan on requesting will change that.
• On the other hand, IF he used a "device" (as described under subsection (c) of 3368), you should be home free by making the arguments you mentioned (no conviction for under 6mph AND the calibration argument (if applicable to the device he used)... in which case, none of the documents that you plan on requesting will undermine or strengthen that.

Good luck!

[PAcitizen]

Good point. I missed that in my research. My reason for requesting so much was for two things:

1) To not show him what I'm really building my defense on.
2) Make him work harder for such a bogus ticket and awful attitude that he had.

[That Guy]

1) To not show him what I'm really building my defense on.

Aaahh, the good old "sneak" attack.... I highly doubt his testimony will be based on what you request. Most likely, he will refer to his notes and build his testimony on the alleged facts as he witnessed them. Those aren't going to change according to what you request.

2) Make him work harder for such a bogus ticket and awful attitude that he had.

Point is, you're creating just as much extra work for yourself by chasing after information that is, in my opinion, immaterial to your case. Your choice though...

[PAcitizen]

What about the TIPMRA defense? Or CFR?

It seems like if it's pace, there's a lot of holes as well after reading some things showing they're inaccurate from federal regulations and documentation, there is no training, there is no true legally mandated calibration of them, then there's errors due to things like tire size, inflation, alternator voltage, etc that make them constantly inaccurate.

I don't mind the work, I want to win this.

[vincedia]

I don't mind the work, I want to win this.

I hate to tell you that you will not win against this officer. He does not care what you do in court, he does not care how much information you request, he does not care about the outcome of the case.

He wrote his ticket, his superior officer knows he wrote the ticket. That's all that matters for most officers.

You requesting a hearing actually does the officer a favor. Most officers get overtime pay for court time, and they love it! (especially when your not represented by a lawyer and you request all this information, because the judge takes your case last thinking it's going to be a pain and he tries to get all those represented out first) so the officer sits half of the day in court getting paid and BS'ing around with other officers. All this time he knows you are not getting paid as you sit in court, so you are losing money being there and this is causing you to suffer a penalty which is all he wanted in the first place.

If you pull off a win, the officer could care less because he fought and ultimately it was the judges decision. His superior officer still gets to list the ticket as a stop for his reports and whatever county council for where you were stopped will see a ticket written.

Just saying that your need to win at this hearing will have no ill effect on the officer you have an issue with.

Vince

[PAcitizen]

Nice opinions, but that's actually not true at all.. here anyways. I know for a fact they care, and they are expected to win. It looks bad if he loses a lot of cases. I am good friends with a cop in his department actually, and I've heard him mention it before for his own trials that he's lost. He wouldn't get stressed over it if it didn't matter.

Their superiors don't like crappy tickets that don't hold up.

These officers do not get overtime pay for court.

I am trying to save some $$$ upfront in preparing as much information to give my attorney first, but I will be represented by my lawyer at the trial. But no use paying him for things I may be able to do on my own. If not, then I'll get a continuance and have him do it.

I don't lose money sitting in court, I am the boss and actually enjoy this.

[whowe]

PACitizen,

Was the name of the State Trooper, Denny Varghese? Because this happened to my friend about 1 hour ago, and exactly the same thing happened.

Got one ticket for going 60 in a 55mph zone. We passed the officer on the left, he was going 55mph apparently, as soon as the rear bumper passed the front of his car he pulled us over. Gave her a second ticket for using the left hand passing lane improperly. She used it to pass him...I still don't get it.

According to the ticket he clocked us for .40 miles, going 60mph. So he would have had to pace us for 24 seconds, which I know for a fact didn't happen. Like I said as soon as the back bumper cleared his front bumper, he pulled us over. Anyways, not going to argue over seconds here.

When he told her about the second ticket, she asked how she misused the left lane if she was passing him? He said there was was room in the middle lane. He was in the middle lane and it even says so on the ticket, did he want her to pass through him? She wasn't giving attitude just asking questions and he just rudely said to take it up with the judge and he walked away mid sentence.

So now she has $200 in fines for using the left hand passing lane to pass a cop going 55mph.

P.S. under the freedom of information act, are we able to obtain the audio and video of the traffic citation, from right before he pulled us over, up until he let us go? He specifically told us that "this traffic stop is being recorded".

[PAcitizen]

No that wasn't him. That sounds pretty crappy though. Can you tell me more about the tickets?

What title section subsection, and everything else is in the tickets?

EDIT: Yes, under PA's right-to-know laws and the freedom of information act you can request them, and I think the cost is about $15 per request. If he said what you said he did, and your friend was very careful in what she said (not admitting guilt for anything is the key) then I would definitely get the recording and use it in court. If you can catch him in a lie that's going to be a problem for him.

[squidley]

Hi PAcitizen, I was the friend that whowe was referencing above. The section and subsection on my speeding ticket is the same as yours, but here's a little more detailed info from the actual tickets themselves...

One ticket for going 60 in a 55 (speeding, clocked, title 75, section 3362, subsection A2) and a second ticket for 'failed to drive in the right hand lane of a limited access highway when the lane was available.' (Title 75, section 3313, subsection D1) with the remark: 'Observed def vehicle from MM 38 with enough room in the middle & right lanes'

A few things, the statements on the two tickets do somewhat contradict themselves, as the speeding ticket says under remarks: 'this officer was in the middle lane and the def. passed the cruiser in the left lane' so, how can there have been 'enough room' in the middle lane as stated on the other driving in the left lane ticket, if his car was in the middle lane? (of course there wouldn't have been room, I was *passing* his car. Also, on the speeding ticket he notes that he was following me 4/10 of a mile, which is definitely not the case. if I was going 60mph, he would have had to follow behind me for 24 seconds. Not sure if i can also bring this up in court, I will have my friend with me who can corroborate, he pulled me over as soon as he moved his car into the left lane behind me, tailgating me. Since the whole thing was recorded, and I did state to him that my odometer was below 60, my friend suggested I also petition to get a copy of the recording and have that for the trial as well. He also refused to explain the second (left hand lane) ticket, which I still am somewhat confused about.