LIDAR Ticket in Pierce County

it was one of those e-tickets that they've been using lately. This one was a little different. In his statement he had a section for "PACE" (followed by his generic statement sans pertinent facts) "Laser" (with the facts relevant for my case) and "Radar" (also followed by his generic statement sans pertinent facts). At the very end he had the typical "i certify under ....." with his name and badge #.

Quote:

---

Quoting davidmcbeth3

---

The question is : does WA require a proper foundation be laid for the admittance of the document or statement? Clearly, the foundation is lacking; the case cited above is just one of many detailing the need for laying a foundation but the need in laying a foundation can be eliminated with certain official proceedings (like tax assessment hearings etc.). So, is there case law in WA traffic tickets (not DUIs but like speeding) out there? I have searched google scholar to no avail (but google scholar is not the greatest - its OK but not as good as other legal resources like westlaw). If a WA case is available (the higher the court, the better :)) many posters & lurkers may appreciate it.

---

See: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx from google scholar - did I ans my own ? or is this a duplicate?
75 Wn. App. 214, BELLEVUE v. LIGHTFOOT
Aug. 1994
[Nos. 29633-7-I; 31830-6-I. Division One. August 1, 1994.]
BELLEVUE v. LIGHTFOOT
THE CITY OF BELLEVUE, Respondent, v. DAVID R. LIGHTFOOT, Petitioner.
THE CITY OF BELLEVUE, Petitioner, v. JOHN STRAUSS, ET AL, Respondents.
[1] Automobiles – Speed – Radar Detection – Reliability – Proof. Police traffic radar results are admissible in a criminal prosecution
if the particular radar device used is shown to be reliable. The reliability of a radar device requires: (1) testimony of the police officer
who used the device to measure the speed of the defendant's vehicle that the device was functioning properly when so used and (2)
testimony from a qualified expert that the device passed the requisite tests and checks to ensure its operational accuracy. Expert
testimony that the engineering design of the particular radar device is generally accepted as reliable in the relevant scientific
community is not required to establish a foundation for admission of the results of the device.
[2] Criminal Law – Evidence – Opinion Evidence – Expert Testimony – Qualifications – Opportunity To Inquire – Necessity. A
criminal defendant must be given an opportunity to ask about the qualifications of an expert witness for the State.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX

So it looks like a foundation is required.

Ticket dismissed because the officer did not state his qualifications or training. Thanks for the help.

Its good to hear that your strategy worked and resulted in success. ;)

Now you can spend the $$$ that you would have paid for with the ticket to buy a jammer :) ...