Unjust California Stop Violation

I live in a small town with only one stop sign on the major road through town. It's pretty rural, with no side walks or cross walks. There is CHP officer who regularly hangs out at this stop sign. I've seen him there for quite awhile now.

So today (around 8:30pm) while going home I arrived at this stop sign, I stopped and looked to my left and saw the CHP officer, I looked to the right, then looked to the left again. I even had enough time to notice that he was blocking a dark red car - so I wondered if he was giving a ticket to this car. After that thoughtful moment I proceeded to make my left turn. He immediately made a U-turn, pulled me over, and gave me a ticket for failing to stop. His note on my ticket claims I failed to stop at limit lime/stop, per the vehicle code.

The problem is - I completely disagree with him. If I had been rolling past the limit line while I was doing all of that looking I would have been in the intersection when I made my left turn.... but I wasn't, I was still at the limit line. A friend was immediately behind me in her own car and even saw me stop.

So my question to this forum: how can I fight this ticket? It seems as though it's my word against his. I did get a written statement from my friend after the incident, just to get it down on paper right away. She lives quite a distance away, so it's not likely I could have her come to court with me. I'm not even sure that's an option. I have only one other question I plan to try to answer tomorrow night: was it even possible for him to see the limit line at 8:30pm at dusk. If it wasn't possible, I'm not quite sure how to document that, since photos probably won't work well enough with the lack of light.

Anyway, thanks in advance for your helpful suggestions.

Quote:

---

how can I fight this ticket? It seems as though it's my word against his.

---

pretty much but it doesn't sound like you understand what you were ticketed for. It wasn't that you didn't stop, it is that you did not stop prior to crossing the stop line or the imaginary line that would be if a line were drawn across the road from the stop sign.

You have to make a full stop before crossing that line. Once you stop before crossing that line, you can move forward to be able to see further down the road to be sure it is clear to proceed.

A car behind you does not have the proper vantage point to be able to determine if you had stopped prior to the limit line or sign. Your car would actually block their view as well as being behind you, they really wouldn't be able to determine if you had crossed that line anyway. As such, their testimony isn't going to be worth anything.

So, did you come to a full stop before crossing the limit line/stop sign?

jk: you have a good point. When the officer stopped me he said I hadn't made the stop at the sign. I disagreed with him, pointing out that I had looked both ways. He then stated that a rolling stop isn't a stop. This is the part I completely disagree with - I know I had completely stopped, because I felt the slight jerk the car makes when you come to a complete stop.

When I look at the Vehicle Code section, however, there is no discussion of rolling stops. As you say, you must stop behind the limit line. Now I can't guarantee I was indeed behind the limit line. I've always wondered how a driver can actually ever know for sure (unless you stop so far behind that you can still see the line.)

However here's another interesting point. I went back to the scene last night and discovered that from where he was sitting you can't actually see the line on the side of the road I was occupying. The road is curved, so you can see the line on the close side - but then you have to imagine where it would be on the far side. So how could he be certain I actually crossed the line (unless my car was noticeably into the intersection)?

I'm less inclined to fight this ticket if it's going to be his word against mine, especially if he's going to argue that I didn't stop before the limit line. But can I make a case about the "rolling stop" simply because of his comment to me?

I wish I had known that actual law wording, because then I would have had him clarify in writing on the ticket exactly how I had broken the law. Thanks for your time.

Quote:

---

Quoting peleela

---

I wish I had known that actual law wording, because then I would have had him clarify in writing on the ticket exactly how I had broken the law.

---

But he DID Clarify... This is from your first post:

Quote:

---

Quoting peleela

---

His note on my ticket claims I failed to stop at limit lime/stop, per the vehicle code.

---

The generic description for a violation of VC 22450(a) is a simple "Failure to Stop at Stop Sign"... And based on the wording in that statute, a violation can be described as either a "rolling stop" (as in not stopping at all) OR "stopping past the limit line". So in my opinion, his notation is pretty specific as to which element you allegedly violated.

I am, by no means, suggesting that you should not fight it. Although I will tell you that it is highly likely that, in an effort to refresh his memory, the officer will review his notation(s) on the citation before he testifies. And by notations, I am also referring to comments that he may have written on HIS copy of the citation (which obviously do not appear on the copy he handed you) after you signed the triplicate form.

If you are adamant about fighting it, you should file serve an informal discovery request wherein you can obtain a copy of his notes. That may give you more information as to his position, what he witness and what information he may offer as part of his testimony. (You can Google "informal discovery request" (or search the forums here) for more information on how to proceed).

Good luck!

the argument about the officer not being able to determine if you had stopped prior to crossing the line would be the best defense as long as he doesn't make the argument you never came to a complete stop at all. Then, depending on the situation, you may not be able to overcome that claim.

as I have said to others: it seems California has the most avenues available to either defeat a ticket or at least minimize the impact. I am not well versed on the specifics of those avenues. There are a few here that do seem to know them well. If they post, it might give you some aid in making the determination of fighting or accepting the ticket.

If the OP does decide to fight the ticket on the basis that the officer could not have seen the limit line, a few quick thoughts:
1. Take some photos from the approximate location of the officer. Take several from different positions since you're probably not sure exactly where he is, and you don't know where he will claim to have been in court. Make sure there are street signs or other landmarks in the photos to establish the location definitively.
2. Get an accurate detailed map of the area. If possible, print out a detailed map from Google, with the satellite overlay.
3. The officer has to testify first. Wait for him to make some statement as to where he was, and wait to see if he makes the claim that you made a rolling stop or if he claims that you were past the limit line. If he claims the rolling stop, your defense based on his line-of-sight probably won't work. By requesting his notes through discovery prior to trial, you can give yourself some idea of what he'll say. Be polite to the officer if you question him.
4. Based on what he says, you can go from there. You can ask him to point out where he was on an accurate map or overhead photo of the area, to make sure it matches what he said earlier. Since you probably can't or aren't going to bring a giant poster-sized map with you to court like you see on TV, ask the officer to mark the spot with a highlighter or something (that you need to bring with you), so that you can hand it to the judge if necessary.
5. When it's your turn to present a defense, this is when you can use the photos you took to show that he could not have seen the limit line, assuming of course that it's true. You would of course only use the relevant photos based on the position the officer indicated - this is why it's important to take several from different locations, because you don't know exactly where he's going to say he was. I'm not a lawyer so I'm not sure what you'd have to do, in advance, to get the photos admitted into evidence. Possibly you'd need a witness to take the photos for you and introduce them, or sign an affidavit, or, well, something that's beyond my knowledge. Hopefully someone else can answer that.
6. If you establish that he can't possibly have seen the limit line, you can move for a dismissal of the charges, without having to testify yourself. If the judge agrees, you're done. If not, you can continue your defense, which is now basically just your testimony.

Obviously if the officer claims you rolled the stop, your limit line defense goes out the window, so it's probably unwise to go ahead and introduce the photos etc., since the judge will likely view the evidence as irrelevant and wasting the court's time. At that point it's "he-said-she-said", and in virtually all cases, the defendant will lose. You could make a stand just on principle, and testify in your own defense anyway. After you lose, you can politely ask the judge for traffic school. Or, you could decide not to make a stand on principle, and tell the judge that you came to court to defend against the limit line violation written on the ticket (which you can show to the judge), but that since the officer is now claiming you rolled the stop sign instead, you'd like to change your plea to guilty to save the court's time, and politely ask for traffic school.


I'm sorry this has happened to you, but it's not the end of the world. Good luck!

Sorry, I forgot about the fact that you had a friend behind you. He/she can testify that you stopped fully (if it's true). It might not carry any weight with the judge, but it's better than your testimony all by itself. That testimony would be relevant only if the officer says you made a "rolling stop", not versus the "limit line" issue. So once again it depends on what the officer says. If your friend is going to testify, you'll probably need him/her in court. Even if some other way of introducing his/her testimony can be found (e.g. sworn notarized affidavit or whatever), it won't carry as much weight with the judge as someone willing to give up his/her time or drive from out of town to appear in court. Did your friend stop and come over to be with you while you were being cited? Did the officer see him/her? It would help establish him/her as a real witness if the officer agrees he/she was at the scene at the time.

Finally, you said that you thought the officer was citing someone else when he spotted you. Can you find out if that's so before trial? Even if you don't know, you can ask the officer about that when he testifies, and if he was citing someone else, try to get him to say how much attention he was paying to that citation at the time he says he saw you. Anything that casts doubt on his observations could help you.

Thanks for the ideas everyone. The ticket doesn't say anything about a rolling stop, and I agree I would have a pretty good defense. I know the closest he could have been, because there was only enough room for the red car and then his car along the side of the road - and he was behind the red car. However, I don't have photos of him sitting behind the red car - nor do I have any witnesses to corroborate my statement. And, he told me I made a rolling stop - so I think I'm up against "he said, she said" no matter what. Sigh, I hate to let him intimidate the community and hand out false tickets.

I'm not that experienced with tickets, so I'm wondering: is it possible to question officers as they write the ticket so they write additional information on the ticket itself while at the scene? It just seems like this whole thing would have been much easier for me to fight if I'd had him note his location, note whether or not I had rolled or stopped past the limit line, etc. Even so, I really question whether I'd have the bravery to actually speak up -- I'd worry he'd slap me with a harrassing an officer charge just for asking a question.

The last time I got a traffic violation (other than speeding - which I've always been doing when I got the ticket, so I never felt angry about those) I was 16 and got to see the judge in his private chambers without the officer because I was a minor. I brought photos of the entire scene, because IMHO the officer was wrong. It turned out the judges office was in the office building directly facing the scene - and he'd seen me taking all the photos. He made the left turn I did every day on his way to work. He totally agreed with me, and agreed that it was a ticket trap.

It was amazing to feel really seen and heard, especially at 16. But alas I don't feel I have that option this time.

Anyway, again thanks for your ideas. I'm pretty sure if I take it to court I forfeit my option for traffic school -- and I doubt I'd win with a "he said, she said" situation. So I'm just going to move on and deal with traffic school.

Quote:

---

Quoting peleela

---

...nor do I have any witnesses to corroborate my statement...

---

What happened to your friend?

Quote:

---

Quoting peleela

---

I hate to let him intimidate the community and hand out false tickets.

---

Traffic enforcement is part of what law enforcement does... So I'm not sure how issuing citations to alleged violators would be "intimidating the community" in any way. More often than not, the community expects, maybe even requests that a department step up traffic enforcement in certain areas. If you want to call that intimidation, then so be it!

Furthermore, do you honestly think that there is a shortage of violators that an officer would have to resort to writing "false tickets"?

Quote:

---

Quoting peleela

---

... whether or not I had rolled or stopped past the limit line, etc.

---

Peleela, think about it. Which one of those actions is legal? (Hint: NEITHER).

Both, rolling a stop and/or stopping past the limit line is in violation of 22450(a).

When the officer is testifying, he only need to articulate the element of the offense which you allegedly violated. "failed to stop at the limit line as required by the vehicle code" (does that sound familiar) is sufficient to establish that a violation was committed. While the added info ("rolled" or "stopped past..." might enforce the premise that you were in violation, the element that must be met by the prosecution was clearly noted on the citation and will more than likely be included word for word in his testimony.

Is he under any obligation to explain that to you or to comply with your request that he write a detailed description of where he was, what he saw, why he decided to cite you? Chances are he made notations regarding those matters on his copy of the citation. Aside from asking you for your license, registration and insurance, and requesting that you sign the citation once it is issued, he is under no obligation to carry on a conversation or comply with your request.

You're free to ask any questions during your cross examination of him, but in reality, asking him "did I roll the stop or did I stop past the limit line?" will not get you anywhere. Why? because regardless of whether he answers with "you rolled the stop" OR "you stopped past the limit line", (and unless it contradicts what he had previously stated in his direct testimony) you are still in violation of the code as it is written and enforced.

You're also free to ask him about his location, his ability to view the limit line... etc, but ultimately, whether the officer has proven his case beyond a reasonable doubt or whether any of those questions can raise sufficient reasonable doubt to refute the officer's testimony is up to the judge.

Quote:

---

Quoting That Guy

---

What happened to your friend?

---

She saw me stop, and could testify to that. She didn't see the red car and this police officer's placement with respect to that car. After she saw me stop, she decided to drive straight and stop to get coffee. So she actually didn't even seen the police officer turn around to issue me a ticket.

Quote:

---

So I'm not sure how issuing citations to alleged violators would be "intimidating the community" in any way.

---

Well, perhaps that's a really strong word to use. However, after doing my own investigating it's clear that you can't see the limit line from the side of the road (where the office was parked.) And, there is an officer parked there very frequently. Considering that he can't actually see the limit line, which is pretty obvious once you are sitting there looking, it causes me to wonder about the integrity of this officer. Granted, I am making the assumption that it is the same officer sitting there each time. If it isn't, then I question the integrity of each of the officers.

Quote:

---

Both, rolling a stop and/or stopping past the limit line is in violation of 22450(a).

---

I believe I did NEITHER. I know I actually stopped, felt the jerk of the car when I actually stopped. And my friend verified that for me. I don't believe I crossed the limit line, because it would have put me pretty far into the actual intersection (remember, this is one of those single painted lines across the road in a rural area.) But regardless of whether or not I did cross the line, he couldn't see the line from his vantage point. That's my point.

Thanks for your time, but at this point I'm pretty resigned to the conclusion that this will be "he said, she said" -- and I don't feel like taking on that battle. Yes, it will ultimately be up to the judge. But advice on this board with this and other threads don't really encourage me to feel there is an option for really being heard about this issue. Namely, that officer(s) are handing out tickets in a situation where they can't actually see the entire scene.