My question involves a traffic ticket from the state of: California
Upon taking a toll road on my way to work one morning, which is at least a 5 lane freeway with 3 lanes going through the automatic toll and 2 to the toll booths. Being that it is in the morning there are lots of vehicles traveling on this road. I noticed a police car on the right side of the road who must have just got done giving a ticket because his red light was still on.
Everyone else noticed him too as he started to take off to merge onto the road. Well, at this time EVERYONE decided to slow down. I was going the speed limit so really didn't feel a need to slow down. The cars in front of me were slowing down trying to make sure that the cop wasn't going to stop them. I had to keep slowing down as the car in front of me kept slowing down and was going at least 5 miles an hour UNDER the speed limit. Well, I kept slowing down as I couldn't change lanes as I didn't want to get in front of the cop on the right and there was a car next to me on the left.
Well, a little up the road the cop stops me and gives me a ticket for following too closely.
I explained to him that if I was I wasn't doing it on purpose and I was trying to slow down but the car in front of me kept slowing down. I told him I am sure that he probably hears that all the time and doesn't believe me. He told me he did believe me but, still gave me a ticket.
I REALLY feel I did NOT do anything wrong. I don't tailgate and I try to obey ALL vehicle laws. I work for an insurance company and I realize what can happen with following too closely. He said he believed me but, still gives me a ticket. I don't get it. I know they need money here in California but, why do I have to pay for doing NOTHING wrong.
I have never taken a ticket to court and I want to know if you feel that I could win?
Thanks
Following Too Closely
Printable View
-
06-08-2010, 01:13 PMnorevsFollowing Too Closely
-
06-08-2010, 02:36 PMThat GuyRe: Following Too CloselyI assume this is what you were cited for:Quote:
Quoting norevs
VC 21703. The driver of a motor vehicle shall not follow another vehicle more closely than is reasonable and prudent, having due regard for the speed of such vehicle and the traffic upon, and the condition of, the roadway.
This is a fairly subjective violation in that the vehicle code does not set a specific distance which may/may not constitute a violation... But lets look at what might happen from here...
The officer will more than likely testify that he witnessed you following too closely -relative the speed that you and the vehicle in front of you were traveling- (and he may even have included some notes on the back of his copy of the citation that you "explained to him that if you were, you weren't doing it on purpose and you was trying to slow down but the car in front of me kept slowing down" which he may also mention as part of his testimony)... Where do you think that leaves you in the eyes of the judge? -
06-08-2010, 09:40 PMBrendanjKeeganRe: Following Too Closely
Norevs: Thanks for the PM. I always make it a priority to read a post by someone who PMs me. But, I do need to inform you now, that I know very little about CA traffic law. So anything I say could be completely wrong. So please, don't take anything I say to heart.
Anyway. In WA, the ticket has a spot where the officer needs to indicate what the roads and weather were like that day. I'm not sure if it has anything on the ticket, but if he indicates that there was heavy traffic, it puts the case into serious question. Mainly because it's simply not possible to "follow" the law if there is heavy traffic. However, you must have done something to attract the officers attention. So the judge is still gonna side with the officer.
An argument that I have seen work in Washington is that the law is too vague. In essence, you have to show that the law is "unconstitutionally vague" in the point that the traveling public has no way of knowing what the officer determines is "reasonable and prudent." Again, Judges hate the vague argument, so you really need to prove that point.
If you want, you can make a very scientific argument, but it might be void in the sense that the judge cannot take judicial notice of the equation, so you might need to present an expert witness to make a scientific argument. In the scientific argument you would need to prove that the officer could not possibly accurately obtain your stopping distance.
There's more I could add, but it would help to see the officer's notes, if you're allowed to see them in CA.
I recommend obtaining discovery and getting a copy of the officer's notes.
Let me know if you need more help. As I have been able to get one of these dismissed.
Brendan -
06-09-2010, 02:55 PMnorevsRe: Following Too Closely
That Guy? Where do YOU think it leaves me in the eye of the judge? Obviously you don't think very good. But, what I told the cop to me isn't discriminating. As far as I am concerned I was not following ANYONE too closely and if I was "IN HIS EYES" then it wasn't on purpose. I don't know where you are from but, in California the traffic here is ridiculous and EVERYONE follows too closely. Not like we have a choice. They are out for money right now and if you sneeze when you drive you will get a ticket. Yes, I was slowing down just like everyone else because I DIDN'T have a choice as EVERYONE else was and I had no where else to go. Maybe I should have just stopped!
Thanks Brendan! I will see on my ticket when I get home what it says. I look around me every day now. And just coming home from work yesterday I was watching a police officer following a car even closer then I was. I also was watching a car following a car much closer then I was and a motor cycle cop just driving right by him. It is so frustrating. I am a good driver and it is JUST WRONG! -
06-09-2010, 03:01 PMjkRe: Following Too Closelywell, that's going to be a failing argument:Quote:
As far as I am concerned I was not following ANYONE too closely and if I was "IN HIS EYES" then it wasn't on purpose. I don't know where you are from but, in California the traffic here is ridiculous and EVERYONE follows too closely.
I wasn't following too closely but everybody does.
does that mean you were the only person not following too closely?
how far away from the toll booth were you, what was the speed of the traffic, and how close were you? -
06-09-2010, 04:18 PMThat GuyRe: Following Too CloselyMy opinion is obviously irrelevant to the outcome of your case... However, based on what you posted here, mainly "if I did it, I didn't do it on purpose" will fall short of raising reasonable doubt that the alleged violation did in fact occur.Quote:
Quoting norevs
Most traffic violations are committed by drivers who did not do it on purpose... But that does not mean that the violation itself did not occur. THAT is what the statute forbids... The action itself and NOT whether it was done purposely or not!
If you meant to say "incriminating", then I disagree. But again, that is my opinion... You're free to believe otherwise!Quote:
Quoting norevs
You'll note that the statute does not include a "willingly/wantonly/purposely" element in it... So the officer is not required to read your mind and articulate his findings to the court, nor is he required establish that you were purposely trying to force your front bumper through the other vehicle's trunk... All he needs to establish is that, in his expert opinion, and based on the prevailing speed/traffic conditions at the time, you were traveling too closely to the vehicle in front of you.Quote:
Quoting norevs
And my guess is that you (as Brendan's commented), had to have done something to attract the officer's attention... My other guess is that "something" is: you were driving VERY close to the vehicle in front of you as traffic was slowing down...Quote:
Quoting norevs
Don't believe me... Cross examine the officer as to why he decided to pick you out of the crowd... And come back and let us know what his answer was!
Furthermore, the prudent thing to do in situations where "everyone drives too close" is to give yourself some extra distance between you and the car in front of you... That way, and in case traffic were to suddenly stop, you have some extra time to react and you are more likely to avoid getting rear ended as well... So you're protecting your front and your rear... No pun intended!
Sure you do... Your vehicle has brakes that are in good working condition, does it not?Quote:
Quoting norevs
Again, not a valid defense... That will probably irritate the judge rather than get him/her to feel any sympathy towards you.Quote:
Quoting norevs
Well, go to court and argue that you had no choice but to tailgate the car in front of you (in other words, incriminate yourself again).Quote:
Quoting norevs
Just keep in mind that the officer has the burden to prove that the alleged violation occurred. You need not say a word... And based on a number of different statements you posted here, I would suggest that you exercise your right NOT to testify...
Good luck! -
06-10-2010, 01:01 PMBrendanjKeeganRe: Following Too Closely
Yes, this would be a situation where you WOULD NOT want to testify against yourself.
Instead, break up the law like so:
VC 21703. The driver of a motor vehicle shall not follow another vehicle / more closely than is reasonable and prudent / having due regard for the speed of such vehicle / and the traffic upon / and the condition of the roadway.
So, you're gonna want to ask him questions to break one point in the law. If the officer doesn't remember what the condition of the roadway was that day, motion for dismissal. If he doesn't remember what traffic was like, motion for dismissal. If he does not make testimony to the speeds of your and the vehicle you were following's vehicles, then motion for dismissal.
Do you see what I'm doing here? This works for a majority of laws under traffic and criminal law. With certain exceptions like speeding and trespassing. (at least in WA)
Again, I don't know if it's possible, but try and get a copy of the police report. I've heard that you can file for it under the FOIA, or you can make a request for discovery. But the officer won't remember A THING unless it's written on that form. Once you get that, you have a strong "case builder."
Brendan -
06-10-2010, 03:40 PMblewisRe: Following Too Closely
I see what you're trying to do, Brendan. Good idea, but I don't know if it will work in this case. The reason is that law is violated if you are following another vehicle "more closely than is reasonable and prudent". The remainder of the law simply simply illustrates the items to be "regarded" in making that determination -- not necessarily "elements" of the infraction. I believe the law is saying if speeds are higher, or if traffic requires it, or the roadway conditions require it, you should be EVEN further away.
But, if the officer does NOT include ALL those items in his testimony, DON'T ask him. If you do, he'll probably say something like, "medium traffic, dry road, 40 - 50 MPH". Then you're stuck -- whether he's right or wrong.
In order to use that defense, simply wait until the officer is done and the prosecution rests. Then move for dismissal pointing out the item the officer failed to testify about and citing the law. Might work, might not.
Some states specify a "gap" in SECONDS. I believe that is the ONLY fair way of assessing whether you're too close. If the law requires you to be at least 2 seconds behind the car in front, that's an easily determined factor -- not subjective in the least.
As such, you could argue that the statute is unconstitutionally vague, since, being a "reasonable and prudent" person, you determined that you were NOT too close. Meanwhile, the officer -- also a "reasonable and prudent" person -- determined that you WERE too close. If there had been a collision, that would be prima facie evidence of "following too close". But, that does not appear to be the case.
So, without an accident, you are left with the officer's "subjective" determination and YOUR "subjective" determination. "Reasonable and prudent" is NOT finitely measurable, lacking a collision. A "difference of opinion" should NOT be the basis for a traffic ticket. So, in some officer's mind, no matter how far behind you were, he might consider you as "driving too close". In other words, you could be cited for a violation of this law, no matter how far apart you are. That makes it "unconsititionally vague and ambiguous".
All that said, you may have a better shot at the trial court level with Brendan's argument. Most trial courts are loathe to rule on the constitutionality of a law. However, on appeal (and constitutionality CAN be raised for the first time on appeal), I think it would have a shot. Given that this is CA, however, not much, but some. On the other hand, if the officer covers ALL of the requisite items, this may be ALL you've got.
Barry -
07-21-2010, 01:55 PMnorevsRe: Following Too Closely
Thanks to both of you on all of your input. I hadn't intended on saying any of the stuff that I posted on this site as testimony in court. I was trying to give you all an idea of what happened and why. As far as I am concerned I WAS NOT following too closely and NO I was not even remotely close to the car in front of me at all. I could see at LEAST 2 car lengths between us. Maybe my counting is faster then his counting. Who knows.
Again thanks! Court date is 8/23/10. What fun! -
08-31-2010, 12:52 PMnorevsRe: Following Too Closely
Just wanted to give you an update. I worried for nothing. Went to court and the officer didn't show up anyway. CASE DISMISSED! :)
Thanks so much! :)