Posted Sign Violation, 21461(A) VC

My question involves a traffic ticket from the state of: California

I was exiting the East Los Angeles College parking structure between Westcott Ave and Schoolside Ave. The exit is constructed so it directs you somewhat to the right lane. I exited into the left lane. Another driver did the same violation that I did and they were right behind me. A cop appears and sirens and then follows me so I pulled over and he wrote me a ticket for a 21461 (a) Posted Sign. There was a posted sign that said right turn only where I exited. I was wondering if there were any technicalities to get the ticket dismissed. I made that turn because I needed to head home to watch my little brother who is autistic. Both my parents work and I'm poor I can't afford another ticket (2 tickets including this one) or a point on my record.
Is there any way to get the ticket dismissed?
Can they add on charges to my ticket? ex: 21461 (a) Posted Sign to a Crossing Double Yellow Line
Is it possible that my situation can get worse if I fight my ticket? ex: judge increases my fine and doubles the points I get
Are there any technicalities I can use to get out of the ticket?

Here's a satellite view to illustrate the OP's situation:

http://img401.imageshack.us/img401/4252/mqschool014.jpg

Quote:

---

Quoting tjackson9810

---

The exit is constructed so it directs you somewhat to the right lane. I exited into the left lane.

---

You mean you exited right (where all the cars are queued up), but then crossed the double-yellows on the main road (Avenida Cesar Chavez) to head east? Or did you exit LEFT (where cars are supposed to enter the campus) and then cross the double-yellows?

Quote:

---

Quoting tjackson9810

---

Can they add on charges to my ticket? ex: 21461 (a) Posted Sign to a Crossing Double Yellow Line

---

They can, but it is almost never done for minor offenses like traffic infractions.

Quote:

---

Quoting tjackson9810

---

Is it possible that my situation can get worse if I fight my ticket? ex: judge increases my fine and doubles the points I get

---

No, not in the way you describe. If you are eligible for traffic school, it may no longer be guaranteed after you fight. Some judges will also decrease fines if you plead guilty/no content in person at arraignment (the appearance date on the ticket). There is no way to keep the point off without fighting unless you get a lawyer.

Quote:

---

Quoting tjackson9810

---

Are there any technicalities I can use to get out of the ticket?

---

Yes, but they're all procedural -- on the merits, you're guilty. Look up trial by written declaration. You will need to scrounge up the fine though (it will be refunded if you win).

I meant that I exited right (where all the cars are queued up), but then crossed the double-yellows on the main road (Avenida Cesar Chavez) to head east.

and I'm not eligible for traffic school since I already got 1 ticket before and took it so would it be better for me to fight it or plead guilty/no content in person at arraignment? Maybe I can get another chance to take the point off with traffic school again? through California Vehicle Code 41501(a) <-- i don't really get that but i think it means you can take traffic school twice but your first ticket needs to be dismissed?

and thank you so much for uploading the picture I tried but I couldn't understand how to post it. I wrote my thread up 3 times cause the link changed.

Quote:

---

There was a posted sign that said right turn only where I exited.

---

combined with a disregard for the sign equals a ticket.

You should have turned right and then turned left into a business (if the road design allows it) or went to an intersection, turned left and then into a business or such so you could reverse your course. Arguing you had to get home to watch your autistic brother doesn't excuse breaking the law.

Quote:

---

Quoting tjackson9810

---

Maybe I can get another chance to take the point off with traffic school again? through California Vehicle Code 41501(a) <-- i don't really get that but i think it means you can take traffic school twice but your first ticket needs to be dismissed?

---

Well, the effect of that section is as follows: for tickets before July 1, 2011, if you took traffic school, the court dismissed your case. Nothing was reported to the DMV and the court/county had the only record. Some counties had agreements with other counties to share their court databases, but there was no statewide system. Now, the court checks with the DMV if you're eligible for traffic school and if you take it, the court informs the DMV and DMV will "hide" the point. Cases are no longer dismissed.

This only matters if your previous conviction/traffic school occurred outside LA county -- in a county which has no data-sharing agreement with LA. In that case, LA might still think you're eligible for traffic school and allow you to take it. Most importantly, you have to be willing to lie under oath (commit perjury), when you sign the traffic school form saying "I have not taken traffic school within the last 18 months." If the judge somehow found out about it (even in the future), he could make life VERY HARD for you (jail time).

You're not going to get rid of the point without a lawyer. The lawyer will typically negotiate with the cop to try to change your infraction into a non-mover with the same fine (or sometimes greater). Other than that, do the TBD, hope the cop doesn't submit his. Go to trial, hope cop doesn't show. There MAY exist technical defenses to the right-turn-only sign (I can't see it on Google Street View), but you have to be willing to play lawyer to even think of trying those.

Even without taking the recent changes into account, the 12hr traffic school was rarely granted because it did NOTHING for insurance rates and was only beneficial for folks who racked up too many DMV points and their license is a ticket or two away from suspension. Contrary to a popular belief, insurance companies go by convictions of moving violations on public record rather than DMV point counts (although both of these match up 99% of the time).

As for taking traffic school more than once per 18mo period, I don't know if judges ream defendants much. From what I've heard, DMV will simply kick back the request to mask a point, with the conviction going on the public record.

In terms of defending against the charge, you don't have much to go on other than hoping the cop doesn't file his TBD or fail to show up for trial de novo. For what it's worth, if you lose the TBD and see your officer in court for trial de novo, there is no law that says you can't ask him to back you up when you ask the judge to bump it down to a non-mover (although it's something only commercial drivers tend to get because they cannot do traffic school and are unemployable with just one or two moving violations on the record). I'm guessing if the fine amount is an issue financially, hiring a lawyer is out of question - it's not even guaranteed to help you any more than competently representing yourself would.

Quote:

---

Quoting HonkingAntelope

---

As for taking traffic school more than once per 18mo period, I don't know if judges ream defendants much. From what I've heard, DMV will simply kick back the request to mask a point, with the conviction going on the public record.

---

Agreed that the DMV will simply kick back the traffic school completion if more than one is submitted within any 18 month period (violation date to violation date)...

Quote:

---

Quoting quirkyquark

---

Well, the effect of that section is as follows: for tickets before July 1, 2011, if you took traffic school, the court dismissed your case. Nothing was reported to the DMV and the court/county had the only record. Some counties had agreements with other counties to share their court databases, but there was no statewide system. Now, the court checks with the DMV if you're eligible for traffic school and if you take it, the court informs the DMV and DMV will "hide" the point. Cases are no longer dismissed.

This only matters if your previous conviction/traffic school occurred outside LA county -- in a county which has no data-sharing agreement with LA. In that case, LA might still think you're eligible for traffic school and allow you to take it.

---

Disagree with this whole analogy of counties sharing dismissals amongst each other as being the only manner to establish eligibility.

That analogy of only each court knowing about traffic school assignments in its own county applies simply to the period between the date a defendant elects the traffic school option, and the date the traffic school completion is reported to the court (technically, 10 days after the citation is dismissed). Example: driver receives 2 citation in LA County, one in East LA the other in Pasadena, goes to ELA, pays the fine, pays for traffic school, then two days late he is in Pasadena trying the same thing, the Pasadena clerk will deny him traffic school option. Had that 2nd citation been up in Fresno, the Fresno court may not find out about his having elected traffic school in ELA, and they'll allow it... Now, even if he completes both and submits both certifictes in a timely manner, the DMV will only allow him one dismissal during the period of 18 months following the citation date from ELA...

And yes, even a court dismissal subsequent to successful completion to traffic violator school -used to be- reported to the DMV:

CVC 1803.5.

(a) In accordance with Section 41501 or 42005, the clerk of a court or hearing officer, when a person who receives a notice to appear at a court or board proceeding for a violation of any statute relating to the safe operation of vehicles is granted a continuance of the proceeding in consideration for completion of a program at a school for traffic violators, a licensed driving school, or any other court-approved program of driving instruction, and which results in a dismissal of the complaint in consideration for that completion, shall prepare an abstract of the record of the court or board proceeding, certify the abstract to be true and correct, and cause the abstract to be forwarded to the department at its office at Sacramento within 10 days after the complaint is dismissed.
(b) This section shall become inoperative on July 1, 2011, and, as of January 1, 2012, is repealed, unless a later enacted statute that is enacted before January 1, 2012, deletes or extends the dates on which it becomes inoperative and is repealed.

ETA:

Scratch that "used to be" and add "used to be reported within 10 days, now the courts are required to report it with 5 days":

Here's the amended version of CVC 1803.5:

CVC 1803.5

(a) In accordance with Section 41501 or 42005, the clerk of a court or hearing officer, when a person who receives a notice to appear at a court or board proceeding for a violation of any statute relating to the safe operation of vehicles is granted a continuance of the proceeding in consideration for completion of a program at a school for traffic violators, that results in a designation of the conviction as confidential in consideration for that completion, shall prepare an abstract of the record of the court or board proceeding that indicates that the person was convicted of the violation and ordered to complete a traffic violator program, certify the abstract to be true and correct, and cause the abstract to be forwarded to the department at its office at Sacramento within five days after receiving proof that the program was completed or the due date to which the proceeding was continued, whichever comes first.

(b) This section shall become operative on July 1, 2011.

Sounds like there is no way to get the point off is there? I'm just worried about my insurance rates going up I'd be happy with paying the fine.
Is there a difference between fighting and plead guilty/no content in person at arraignment?
How does plead guilty/no content in person at arraignment work?

thanks you guys for the help

Quote:

---

Quoting tjackson9810

---

Sounds like there is no way to get the point off is there?

---

Not unless you're one of the lucky ones where the officer either doesn't file his declaration (in a TBD) or doesn't appear in court for trial.

Quote:

---

Quoting tjackson9810

---

Is there a difference between fighting and plead guilty/no content in person at arraignment?

---

Fighting it might imply a lower chance of a fine reduction whereas pleading "guilty" or "no contest" at the arraignment might offer a higher chance! No guarantees either way though...

Quote:

---

Quoting tjackson9810

---

How does plead guilty/no content in person at arraignment work?

---

What do you mean "how does it work?"... You appear in court, your name is called, you walk up to the podium, judge reads you the charge and your rights, and asks you for a plea... You either plead "guilty" or "no contest". The judge imposes a fine, you can ask for a reduction, an extension to pay... etc.

You may find this website helpful in answering most questions.

Good luck...

Its hard to see but the height of the no right turn might be an issue. Plus the driver stated that he turned right but then did a u-turn later? The cop may just say you turned left & this will kill this defense. Go back and provide the no right turn sign height, pavement to bottom of sign. If under 5 ft, take pictures.