School Zone Ticket with LIDAR in California

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

This is my first time on here, can someone please help me fight this ticket?
I was on my way to work and I was being very carful not to break the speeding limit as I was not late to work. The speed limit on the road in particular that I was driving on was 40mph, however; Immediatly the road turned into a 25mph school zone with an illuminated sign to slow down. So I proceeded to slow down. As I did, other cars were passing me by. There were some officers stationed right in front of the school as a speed trap. They pulled me over and said I was going 42mph. I asked the officer to show me the certification of the accuracy of the devise he used, but he denied. I signed the ticket and went on my way. I am planning on fighting this in court. On the ticket it said a Lidar was used.
What I have gathered so far is:
1)
according to the CA DMV site, http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d11/vc22358_4.htm
I understand that in order for the road to be within regulation, the speed limit immediatly before the 25mph school zone must be no greater then 30mph. In fact it was 40mph. This does not give reasonable time for a person to slow down in time without creating other traffic hazards.
2)
I am not sure if California has judicial notice on lidar devices... ??
3)
I believe Lidar uses light to deliver feedback, and on that particular day and time, the sun was right behind me, my headlights were off, my car has not been washed for months, and I dont have a front license plate on.
4)
It was a Thursday morning at 8:34 am. The school was gated all the way around, and the officer took my reading at what I believe was about 1000 ft away.
5)
There was 2 officers at the scene of the incident
6)
It was a 2 lane street in both directions. The officer slowed down lane 2 to reach me which I was in lane 1. This slowed down traffic dramatically.

What should I gather and where? How Can I battle this in court?
Thank you!

Does anyone have any suggestions?

Quote:

---

Quoting WhatADream

---

Does anyone have any suggestions?

---

Suggestions? Yes, next time cool it on the other threads if you want the knowledgeable members here to chime in on your issue...

I do not consider myself in that club BTW.

GL

A

Ok, So im trying to make some moves regarding this ticket. I am trying to put together a discovery letter. Can anyone help me figure out exactly what I should ask for, and who I should send it to?
thanks... Im not to experienced with this kinda stuff

Quote:

---

Quoting WhatADream

---

1)
according to the CA DMV site, http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d11/vc22358_4.htm
I understand that in order for the road to be within regulation, the speed limit immediatly before the 25mph school zone must be no greater then 30mph. In fact it was 40mph. This does not give reasonable time for a person to slow down in time without creating other traffic hazards.

---

I'm not sure how that could help your case any. While that may aid in lowering the 40mph speed limit in the zone prior to the school zone, the 25mph limit itself (which is what you were cited for exceeding) would still be valid by virtue of the fact that it is a statutory speed limit (pursuant to VC 22352).

Even if you were to bring up the argument that you didn't have time to slow down, it is clear that (with a speed measurement of 42mph while you were in the school zone) you never even attempted to... So were the 25mph limit signs obstructed or not visible?

You are free to request a copy of the Engineering and Traffic Survey for that segment of the roadway. If you can find 22358.4 listed as part of the justification to set the speed limit there at 25mph, then you might have a point. My guess is that you'll find that the survey uses VC 22352 (specifically paragraph "(a)(2)(B)" of 22352 as justification for the 25mph school zone.

Quote:

---

Quoting WhatADream

---

2)
I am not sure if California has judicial notice on lidar devices... ??

---

You're free to make that argument in court. However, you should keep in mind that regardless of whether California courts have taken judicial notice of Lidar or not, the trier of fact (the judge) has enough discretion to weigh the evidence (the officer's testimony, your cross examination and your testimony (if you choose to testify) and make a decision accordingly. In addition to the Lidar reading that the officer obtained, he will likely testify that he conducted a visual estimate of your speed (with an error rate of +/-5mph)... This is an integral part of the officer's Radar/laser certification. So in the unlikely event that you are able to get the Lidar reading thrown out, the officer's visual estimate would stand and is often sufficient for a conviction.

Quote:

---

Quoting WhatADream

---

3)
I believe Lidar uses light to deliver feedback, and on that particular day and time, the sun was right behind me, my headlights were off, my car has not been washed for months, and I dont have a front license plate on.

---

Again, the officer is likely to utilize two speed estimates (visual and lidar) as part of his testimony. So even if the judge were to allow you to present a scientific analysis to refute the Lidar reading (and chances are he/she won't), you're still dealing with the visual estimate which you will not be able to refute.

Quote:

---

Quoting WhatADream

---

4)
It was a Thursday morning at 8:34 am. The school was gated all the way around

---

You may have a point there.... You can cite the relevant portions of 22352(a)(2)(B) which state:

When approaching or passing a school building or the grounds thereof, contiguous to a highway and posted with a standard "SCHOOL" warning sign, while children are going to or leaving the school either during school hours or during the noon recess period. The prima facie limit shall also apply when approaching or passing any school grounds which are not separated from the highway by a fence, gate, or other physical barrier while the grounds are in use by children and the highway is posted with a standard "SCHOOL" warning sign.

Then again, who's to say that children were not present (running late) at 8:34am?

Quote:

---

Quoting WhatADream

---

4)
It was a Thursday morning at 8:34 am. The school was gated all the way around, and the officer took my reading at what I believe was about 1000 ft away.

---

1000 feet is well within the reasonable range for a Lidar measurement.

Quote:

---

Quoting WhatADream

---

5)
There was 2 officers at the scene of the incident

---

How many officers signed the citation? If it is only one, then I suspect that he was the witnessing officer as well as the citing officer which would also mean that only he is required to appear and testify. If the citation has 2 signatures, then you can make a hearsay objection if he were to testify on behalf of the other officer.

More likely than not, the presence of 2 officers would suggest that they are working in pairs pursuant to a department policy. So if one is scheduled to appear in court, you can bet that his partner will be there as well.

Quote:

---

Quoting WhatADream

---

It was a 2 lane street in both directions. The officer slowed down lane 2 to reach me which I was in lane 1. This slowed down traffic dramatically.

---

Irrelevant!

Quote:

---

Quoting WhatADream

---

Ok, So im trying to make some moves regarding this ticket. I am trying to put together a discovery letter. Can anyone help me figure out exactly what I should ask for, and who I should send it to?
thanks... Im not to experienced with this kinda stuff

---

It would take me hours to cover the whole procedure. Do some searching either on the forums here or Google “informal discovery request” and you'll find plenty of guidance. You can then come back with specific questions and we'll go from there.

Check your local library for fight your ticket type books. FightYour Ticket...and Win! by David Brown is a good one with plenty of examples of how to fill out forms and write motions, etc.

"I was very careful not to be speeding"
My goodness ! Shove it high & shove it deep lmao.
We dont care if you were speeding here as long as you dont talk to the cops. I speed almost ALL the time. Now what I would recommend with discovery(D) AND FOIA(F) requests: 1) certificate of calibration of LIDAR unit (D w/DA & F w/police) 2) manuals for LIDAR unit (D & F like #1) 3) request for the production of tangible things - (a) being the LIDAR unit itself for inspection , (b) inspection of any testing areas that officers may use for any distance testing with the LIDAR unit , (c) inspection of the vehicle used by officer (D & F like #1). 4) any and all documents, which would also include any police regulations regarding anything related to the calibration of LIDAR instrument(s) - (D & F like #1). Any LIDAR training records including any certificates of completion of any type of LIDAR training completed by the officer (D & F like #1). Any documents showing the officer completed any other type of speed measuring training (D&F like #1). List of any expert witnesses & reports relied upon by expert, CV of expert, list of publications he had his work published in, subject matter which he will testify to, name, address etc.. (D to DA). I have much more you can ask for...PM me if interested.

In order for the 25mph school zone limit to apply, as TG pointed out, there must be children present. It is NOT prima facie evidence that children were present. In other words, it cannot be ASSUMED that they were. It will be the burden of the prosecution to PROVE that there were children present. So, it is up to the OP to decide if he thinks the prosecution will have a good argument here. Were there still crossing guards posted? Were there children crossing the street are in the area? Was 8:34 before or after the "tardy bell" rings in that school? These are points that the OP can raise in cross examination of the cop.