ExpertLaw.com Forums

Fighting a Speeding Ticket Based on ETS (Traffic Survey) and Officer's Mistake

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page
Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 ... Next LastLast
  • 01-06-2012, 01:03 AM
    98redrang
    Fighting a Speeding Ticket Based on ETS (Traffic Survey) and Officer's Mistake
    My question involves a traffic ticket from the state of: CA CVC 22350 for "+70" in 60 zone on CA 101 near Salinas.
    I have received (first time!) a copy of the ETS, ticket, cal logs, and officers written dec...

    I lost my trial by written dec, and have trial in a week.

    The ETS (traffic survey) I got seems a bit analytically deficient. It said 65 is the JUSTIFIED speed, but people want it lower, so its lower. Also it list some numbers for the survey, but with no units so I have idea what they mean or how derived. what does a rate of "9.5" mean? is that accidents(?) per month, per year, for all CA, all of 101, that mile marker...??
    OF the 3 listed mile point numbers one was lower then the 'typical' listed number. so is that good or bad? again the ETS has no explanation. the survey actually says "this survey meets 40802b" when I think its technically deficient and lacking in info required by 40802b. An example of a proper ETS would be good if someone could point me to one.

    Any thoughts on trying to attack the ETS during the trial as technically deficient thus dismissing ticket with the officers testimony and 60 speed limit? Or do all Cal trans ETS look like they were conducted poorly.
    The ETS also does not have a full name as a signatory. so I cant look up if that person is a registered engineer.

    On the officers written declaration(TR-235), I noticed two mistakes
    1) officer has both item [4] (ETS within 5 year) and item [6] (ETS within 7 and 10 years) with [6a] and [6b] checked -"all elements in item 5"
    why are both items 4 and 6 checked and why is 6b is check saying "all of item 5" when he did not check item 5.

    To me this is contradiction (because he actually does not know if the ETS is valid) and an error worthy of tossing out the declaration on a technicality. 10 years ago I had a motion to dismiss a case denied because the judge "thought" I checked a wrong box...he never bothered to read the motion, he just 'thought' it was for aircraft survey (and not officer notes like checked), so i'm willing to try the technicality route, would this work?

    2) in the cops written, he Identifies me correctly on one line, but a sentence later lists a different Mr.lastname! clearly he forgot to re read his boilerplate declaration! he is basically says a different driver signed the violation.Can I get out on a technicality on this?

    The ticket itself actually has PACE AND rader/LIDAR checked as method- can they just check all of the methods and hope one sticks??

    He also said I passed him doing 80! which I don't drive that fast I know I did not PASS him and let him follow me (pace)for 1.5miles- which again tells me his written is just boiler plate that he changes name and car details.
    if I was doing +70 and thus 'unsafe' why did he take 1.5 miles to pull me over? could I say I WAS safe at my speed which is why he did not pull me over right away?
  • 01-06-2012, 03:01 AM
    quirkyquark
    Re: C Vc22350 Mistake in Officers Written Dec and Traffic Survey (Ets);trial in Week
    Post ETS and cops declaration for us to review. Imageshack.com etc.
  • 01-06-2012, 12:26 PM
    That Guy
    Re: Fighting a Speeding Ticket Based on ETS (Traffic Survey) and Officer's Mistake
    Quote:

    Quoting 98redrang
    View Post
    The ticket itself actually has PACE AND rader/LIDAR checked as method- can they just check all of the methods and hope one sticks??

    If he testifies at the TDN, that he simply paced you (irrespective of what he said in his declaration) then you're up **** creek simply because speed trap laws don't apply to a pace.

    But it still would be interesting to see his declaration, but in addition, I would like to know how you worded you discovery request with respect to calibration certificates, and which calibration certificates they provided you with; his notes might also provide some insight... So why not upload and post EVERYTHING you have!.
  • 01-06-2012, 12:41 PM
    98redrang
    Re: C Vc22350 Mistake in Officers Written Dec and Traffic Survey (Ets);trial in Week
    correction : the accident rate is listed as '1.07', and the ETS doc does have a name on it.
    I have posted the docs to this site:

    http://s191.photobucket.com/albums/z...t%20documents/
  • 01-06-2012, 12:46 PM
    That Guy
    Re: C Vc22350 Mistake in Officers Written Dec and Traffic Survey (Ets);trial in Week
    Quote:

    Quoting 98redrang
    View Post
    correction : the accident rate is listed as '1.07', and the ETS doc does have a name on it.
    I have posted the docs to this site:

    http://s191.photobucket.com/albums/z...t%20documents/

    according to his declaration, that's a pure "pace" and if he duplicates that at the TDN, you're going to get nowhere arguing a requirement for the survey or any details therein!

    Good luck!
  • 01-06-2012, 01:06 PM
    davidmcbeth3
    Re: C Vc22350 Mistake in Officers Written Dec and Traffic Survey (Ets);trial in Week
    The officer has conflicting facts stated regarding the pace. First he says 1.5 miles, then when he pulled up to your vehicle, you pulled over...appears as if a proper pace did not occur.

    Additionally, the speedometer calibration does not appear to be valid. No certificate of calibration is shown, just a legal conclusion that it was calibrated. And a police officer hardly has the skills needed to perform such a calibration nor the equipment to do one. I know what they do...they drive around at various speeds and use their RADAR/LIDAR to check the speed by which the vehicle is going. However, the RADAR/LIDAR is not designed to perform this task.

    Of course, the officer's statement can be used to impeach him at trial...if he shows up.
  • 01-06-2012, 01:23 PM
    98redrang
    Re: C Vc22350 Mistake in Officers Written Dec and Traffic Survey (Ets);trial in Week
    I did receive a copy of the speedometer calibration (though technically I feel it is lacking but oh well) along with the lidar and training certs per my discovery request. However he did not included a copy of it with his written declaration, and I did Not submit a of copy of it with my written statement, so I don't know if it is actually entered into the record. Could I ask him at trial to produce the copy and if he does not then call him on it?
    So the speed trap/ETS defense is out, what about the wrong name on his dec? Also he states I passed him doing 15mph over the limit and he then followed me.
    but im not so blind that I dont know when I blow past a CHP on the highway, especially since I know was not not passing anyone on the 101 at ~70mph.
  • 01-06-2012, 02:15 PM
    quirkyquark
    Re: C Vc22350 Mistake in Officers Written Dec and Traffic Survey (Ets);trial in Week
    Quote:

    Quoting 98redrang
    View Post
    So the speed trap/ETS defense is out...

    Please post a copy of EVERYTHING as multiple "experts" have requested. Include the ticket (which you say has radar/lidar checked), the TR-2xx form which contains the officer's declaration and the speedometer calibration.

    If there is even a hint of radar/lidar use, case law strictly holds that the speed trap laws apply. If the same 3-page survey you posted is produced at trial, it's inadmissible because it contains none of the raw data.
  • 01-06-2012, 02:49 PM
    That Guy
    Re: C Vc22350 Mistake in Officers Written Dec and Traffic Survey (Ets);trial in Week
    Quote:

    Quoting quirkyquark
    View Post
    Please post a copy of EVERYTHING as multiple "experts" have requested. Include the ticket (which you say has radar/lidar checked), the TR-2xx form which contains the officer's declaration and the speedometer calibration.

    And of course as we always say, redact all personal information before you upload and post.


    Quote:

    Quoting quirkyquark
    View Post
    If there is even a hint of radar/lidar use, case law strictly holds that the speed trap laws apply.

    Agreed...

    Quote:

    Quoting quirkyquark
    View Post
    If the same 3-page survey you posted is produced at trial, it's inadmissible because it contains none of the raw data.

    Without the hint mentioned above, no survey is required!

    And just to be clear, a scribble in the Radar/Lidar/Patrol Vehicle number Box on form TR-130, is not necessarily indicative of Radar/Lidar use, if it resembles a number, it could also be referring to the "Patrol Vehicle Number" thereby referencing the speedometer used during the pace. Just saying...
  • 01-06-2012, 02:58 PM
    quirkyquark
    Re: C Vc22350 Mistake in Officers Written Dec and Traffic Survey (Ets);trial in Week
    ^^^^ Thanks for the redactiOn reminder and the clarifications, TG---absolutely correct. If it turns out that there was no radar/lidar, we'll try to parse the statement to come up with possible cross-examination questions for pacing, but it'll be an uphill climb...
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page
Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 ... Next LastLast
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:42 PM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.4
Copyright © 2023 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
Copyright © 2004 - 2018 ExpertLaw.com, All Rights Reserved