Stop Sign Violation at an Intersection with Traffic Signal
My question involves a traffic ticket from the state of: Washington
I was driving down the road when an officer raced in behind me and pulled me over. The officer was in a very bad mood and was obviously upset with me. He asked me if I knew why he stopped me and I said no. I do not know where he was sitting when he supposedly saw me as I never saw him. He took my information back to his car and several minutes later came back with a ticket. He tossed the ticket and my information in to my lap and rudely asked if I had any questions. I said no and he turned and walked away without saying anything else.
At first I expected to see a speeding ticket as he said I was speeding but the ticket was for "46.61.200 FAIL TO STOP AT STOP SIGN."
I have contested the ticket as I am convinced he mistook my car for someone else for several reasons. So long story short my defense was going to be mistaken identity. After googling the RCW though, it seems to be specifically for stop signs and the intersection in question has a traffic signal. RCW 46.61.200 is "Stop intersections other than arterial may be designated." The text of the code talks about "posted and maintained proper signs of the standard design adopted by the state department of transportation" and "and bearing the required sign" but does not talk about traffic signals at all. It seems traffic signals are in a completely different section. As the intersection he wrote on the ticket clearly has a traffic signal and not a stop sign, I wonder if that is a better defense than the mistaken identity.
When I was stopped I was on my way home from work. No where between my job and where I was stopped are there any stop signs. They are all traffic signals. If it turns out RCW 46.61.200 has no application with traffic signals I intend to bring photos of the intersection to court. I do not have the officer's statement as I am sending that letter today. Is there anything else I should ask for?
So if I do use that as my defense, will the judge just say "Well it is obvious the officer meant to say traffic signal and just made a simple mistake" or something to that effect? Or can RCW 46.61.200 also be applied to a traffic signal? Would I be better off sticking with my mistaken identity as he stopped me over a mile from this intersection in heavy traffic and probably just confused my car with someone else?
Thanks in advance for any help or suggestions with this.
Re: Stop Sign Violation at an Intersection with Traffic Signal
Read this first. Next, serve a proper discovery request on the prosecutor's office and file it with the court. Scan and post the results here after you redact any personal information.
Out of curiosity, what is the address listed on the ticket for the location that the infraction allegedly occurred?
Re: Stop Sign Violation at an Intersection with Traffic Signal
There is not an address listed but an intersection. In the "At location ref trafficway" box it says It says "S Washington St and W 1st Avenue."
Re: Stop Sign Violation at an Intersection with Traffic Signal
I assume, due to the intersection search I came up with, that this was in Seattle proper, and you were stopped by one of Seattle's finest?
What street were you driving on, and which direction? First (which is my assumption), or S. Washington?
The nearest stop signs to this intersection are Occidental/Washington to the East, and James/Yesler to the North.
Oh, and if indeed it shows up this way in the officer's statement (stop sign), do not inform the prosecutor. Wait until your court date and request a dismissal due to the fact that there is no stop sign at that intersection. The whole trick is to spring the officer's mistake on them at the hearing.
Re: Stop Sign Violation at an Intersection with Traffic Signal
This was actually in the city of Kennewick, in South East Washington.
It was in the city limits and the ticket was issued by a Kennewick police officer.
I was pulled over at 10th and Washington or about 3300 feet of 30 MPH roads from the intersection listed on the ticket. I was driving South on Washington and went through the listed intersection on a green light, but like I said I don't know where the officer was sitting or what direction he thinks I was going.
Re: Stop Sign Violation at an Intersection with Traffic Signal
Where did you enter S. Washington from? Was there a signal, a stop sign, or a driveway, possibly an alley? There ONLY stop sign ON S. Washington from Clover Island clear down to the other end at E 27th Ave is AT E 27th Ave. The only other stop signs in the whole area are along S. Washington and are on side streets.
I wouldn't ask for a dismissal. I would ask that the judge find the infraction NOT COMMITTED.
Re: Stop Sign Violation at an Intersection with Traffic Signal
Speedy, thank you very much for your help to this point.
Yes you are correct, the only stop sign I am aware of on Washington street is at the very end on 27th Ave where you must either turn left or right on 27th from Washington. That is miles from where I was stopped or from the intersection in question.
I entered Washington street from Columbia Drive. I work in Pasco (a neighboring city) and came in to Kennewick by driving south over the Cable Bridge. At the Kennewick end of the Cable Bridge I took the free right turn lane on to Columbia Drive heading west - no signal or stop sign for that lane. From Columbia Drive I turned left on to Washington street at the traffic signal there. I don't remember for sure, but I assume at that time of day I probably waited at that light until there was a green arrow to turn left. At that time of day (4:45 p.m.) there is an endless stream of eastbound traffic on Columbia Drive so I would have most likely had to wait for the arrow but again I am not sure. Now heading South on Washington, the first traffic signal I come to is at 1st ave which is where the officer is saying I "ran the stop sign." I did not have to stop for that light as it was green for me so I continued south. As I neared the Red Apple store (which is at the NW corner of 10th and Washington) I noticed an officer coming up behind me very quickly weaving in and out of traffic behind me. I pulled over to let him pass and he pulled in behind me. Once I realized he was stopping me I pulled in to the Red Apple parking lot so we weren't blocking traffic. So the only stop sign I had driven through that afternoon/evening was in the parking lot leaving work and that is 8 miles away in a different city.
I have one more quick question. I have read the information you linked to and completed the Discovery Request you also linked to (thank you very much for those links.) I would like to submit those to the court by certified mail as it would be difficult for me to do it in person in within the time allowed due to work. I would separately send one copy to the Court Clerk for filing and one copy to the Prosecutor, correct? Should they be identical copies, or should I somehow note on the Clerk's copy that it is to file? The little card they sent me with my hearing date is extremely vague.
Thank you again for your help. You have been great.
Re: Stop Sign Violation at an Intersection with Traffic Signal
Certified Mail & Return Receipt Requested.
One copy to the court clerk for filing with the court.
One copy to the Prosecuting Attorney so they can meet your discovery request.
I include a short note/letter to each on what they were for.
Re: Stop Sign Violation at an Intersection with Traffic Signal
Quote:
Quoting
lurkertom
Certified Mail & Return Receipt Requested.
One copy to the court clerk for filing with the court.
One copy to the Prosecuting Attorney so they can meet your discovery request.
I include a short note/letter to each on what they were for.
Yup, and keep the original for yourself and bring it to court.
Re: Stop Sign Violation at an Intersection with Traffic Signal
I just today got the discovery. Here it is scanned.
First, the ticket in question
http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j1...7/scan0001.jpg
Now the two page discovery
http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j1...7/scan0002.jpg
http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j1...7/scan0003.jpg
There are so many things wrong with his statement I don't even know where to start. But here are a few:
1. High rate of speed" on Washington at 16:48??? I would be lucky to break 20 or 25 mph.
2. I still don't know where he was and it doesn't say. If he "Cleared the intersection and observed the traffic light turn red" then does that mean he was in front of me? If so, why did he have to "turn around" to contact me? He raced up to me from a long way back and didn't catch up to me for 10 blocks.
3. Note that the narrative says he cited me for a stop light but the ticket is for a stop sign, which doesn't exist at that intersection.
Anyway, any help or suggestions that anyone can offer me would be greatly appreciated and thanks again.
Pat
Re: Stop Sign Violation at an Intersection with Traffic Signal
"Your Honor, I move to suppress the officer's statement, as it clearly pertains to a 'stop light' infraction (RCW 46.61.055), while the ticket was written for a 'stop sign' infraction (RCW 46.61.200). I further move for dismissal due to lack of evidence."
Barry
Re: Stop Sign Violation at an Intersection with Traffic Signal
Is this a pretty sure thing? Do you all feel pretty confident that I will be able to get out of this? I will need to take time off work to fight this and that will be significantly more financial expense for me than the cost of paying this ticket. I want to fight it because right is right and I know I didn't commit the offense. But if the Judge says the officer made a simple mistake and the citation still stands (or something like that) I will just save myself the effort now and pay the $124. So to the people that have done this or watched these types of things in court, what is your opinion? Is this a pretty sure thing? 50/50?
Thanks again
Re: Stop Sign Violation at an Intersection with Traffic Signal
If it took him 8 blocks to catch you and he had to turn around, there is no way he kept you in sight.
Re: Stop Sign Violation at an Intersection with Traffic Signal
I would say this has a 99% success rate. If there's a prosecutor and he amends the ticket, I would say you still have a 95% success rate. But he would need to amend the ticket to lose that 4%.
Use Barry's motion. Except I might change it to (don't give away the statute for the prosecutor...make them look it up):
"Your Honor, I move to suppress the officer's statement, as it is the wrong statute. The statute in question states 'It is unlawful for any person operating any vehicle when entering any intersection determined, designated, and bearing the required sign to fail and neglect to bring the vehicle to a complete stop before entering the intersection.' There is no such sign at this intersection. I further move for dismissal due to lack of evidence."
If a prosecutor objects and amends the citation, then I would object saying "Your honor, The prosecutor, as a trained professional, should have been reasonably aware of the officer's mistake and should have given ample notice to this defendant on the amendment of the charge. Without notice, I am unable to adequately prepare a defense. I object to any amendment of the infraction as it prejudices my rights."
In which case, the Judge may say something to the effect that he will accept the amendment but will give you time (or a continuance) to prepare a defense. If he does accept the amendment, tell the judge that you are ready to continue with the hearing instead of taking the continuance. Thus, you won't have to go home and spend another day in court.
After that, "Your honor, I move to dismiss as the officer did not state that I ENTERED the intersection when the light was red. He only states that I CONTINUED through the intersection, which is not prohibited by any law. Furthermore, he never gives his location in reference to my location."
Re: Stop Sign Violation at an Intersection with Traffic Signal
Well tomorrow is the big day. Any last minute tips anyone?
I have to say I am pretty nervous, which I think is pretty stupid because the worst that can happen is they make me pay the ticket which is about the same $ as a tank of gas. Still, for some dumb reason I am nervous about this. My wife thinks I should have just mailed in payment right after I got it and forgot about the whole thing and maybe I should have.
Still I am out for what's "right" here. Wish me luck!
Re: Stop Sign Violation at an Intersection with Traffic Signal
Infraction not commited. Thanks to all for your help.
Re: Stop Sign Violation at an Intersection with Traffic Signal
Congratulations! Care to elaborate? What did you end up saying? What did the prosecutor say (if there was one)? What did the judge say?
Thanks for letting us know.
Barry
Re: Stop Sign Violation at an Intersection with Traffic Signal
I will try to summarize the entire experience if I can.
I got there about 45 minutes early. All courtrooms were locked so I took a seat on the bench in the hall. I must have gotten there at just the right time because I went right through security but right behind me about 20 people showed up and security was definitely a bottleneck. People kept coming long after all the benches in the hall were taken so there were many people standing in the halls. The hall I was in had 6 courtrooms, and by looking at the posted schedule many/most/all? of the 6 were for traffic issues that day. There were probably 200 people in "my" hall waiting. One at a time the courtrooms were unlocked at about 1:00pm and people filed in to their respective rooms. My assigned time was 1:06pm (as was everyone else’s in that hall.) My courtroom started on time to the second.
There were about I'd guess 25-30 contested infractions in "my" courtroom that day and I was somewhere near the middle of the pack, maybe number 20 or so. The Judge based the order we went on where we were sitting (which I am sure no one knew walking in the room and picking seats at random - I sat near the front on the left side.) He called us one at a time up to the podium, asked us our names, swore us in, and basically talked to us. It was much less "formal" than I expected which was a huge relief to me.
For each case, he offered the three "choices" we had before he heard our story. Defer (if we were eligible, which not everyone was,) Mitigate, or Contest. The Judge was extremely friendly and I feel like he was genuinely trying to be helpful. I am sure no one felt rushed. Looking back on it I think the Judge's perceived "easy-going" attitude probably helped people to be more "honest" so that was a good play on his part.
There was no prosecutor in the room. Some prosecutor/attorney looking people came and went freely walking in to the courtroom in the middle of a case, walking up to the recorder/clerk and talking to her for a minute, and then leaving but none of them stayed. The only fixtures in the room were the clerk/recorder which the Judge asked simple questions to occasionally, the Judge himself, and "us." One person required an interpreter and when the interpreter showed up that person went next which was out of the "order" he was calling people out of the audience.
He said right off the bat that he was going to call people based on “his” order and that he felt sorry for the first person up, but that he would use that person to explain how he operated his courtroom to the rest of us. The first person up was a woman who had been involved in a fender bender and was cited for following too close. She elected to contest so the Judge read the "evidence" against her. Since there were no officers in the room the only evidence against her (or any of us) was the officer's sworn statement. When he was done reading, the Judge asked the woman what her defense was. As she started talking the Judge cut in with "Keep in mind the officer did not say in his statement who was 'Car 1' and who was 'Car 2'." The woman piped up "Wait I have pictures" and the Judge said "It is to your benefit that the officer did not clarify that." The woman piped up several more times before she was 'smelling what the Judge was stepping in.' The Judge dismissed that case on an inadequate statement or something like that. I don’t know if she “got off easy” because she was first or not. But she got off with a dismissed.
There were several other cases before mine and it was very interesting to hear them. There were a couple of cases that I would consider somewhat similar to mine in the sense they were some kind of officer error. Most other cases where the Judge deciding that the offense was committed but he reduced the expenses and that was regardless of the "choice" the defendant made at the beginning (deferral, contest, etc.) It seemed that most speeding tickets, for example, were decided to be "offense committed" and he would reduce a speeding ticket from ~$150 to ~$100 based on "what they (defendant) learned that day" and I would say that was the average. One person had a cell phone violation that was found "not committed" because he produced cell phone records that showed no calls or texting during that time and his defense was that it was an MP3 player that looked like a cell phone. There was a defendant that had a ticket for several offenses (no insurance, loud stereo, loud exhaust, speeding, defective equipment) and the Judge reduced some of the offenses but left loud stereo and loud exhaust for example. There were a few "driving without insurance" infractions that the judge reduced to $25 "court costs" after the defendant produced proof they had insurance at the time they were stopped. In the (fairly few) cases where it came down to simply the "word" of the officer vs. the "word" of the defendant, the Judge always found in favor of the officer as he found the infraction committed. He justified it by saying basically the officer has no reason to lie but he always reduced the "bail." I can say that I don't recall anyone walking in there and paying face value of their infraction. I think every single one was at least reduced regardless. I also think that regardless, I would always choose "Contested" because it didn't seem to matter much from where I was sitting what option the defendant chose (Contested, Mitigated, Deferred) but contested was the only option where you could potentially be let off with no expense. Of course this is assuming you didn't commit the infraction.
There is another thing I have to say and this might come off as wrong to some people but I have to say it. I can’t believe how unprepared some people are when they go to court. When I went in I read the cell-phone policy and the dress code and I went in prepared to defend myself. I think of the 20 or so other cases I saw today, there was only one other person anywhere close to as prepared as I was and that person was dismissed from a Reckless Driving 2nd Degree ($600+). The vast majority of people walked in there with ripped clothes, smelling like smoke, unshaven, ineligible for deferral due to their record, and with absolutely zero paperwork in their hands. Most had not even requested discovery let alone had a copy of it with them. Most had absolutely zero defense prepared and were probably guilty of whatever they were accused of in my opinion. Many did not even know what they would choose among Mitigation, Contest, and Defer as they had given it no thought. Still, the Judge took the time to listen to their “defense” (excuses) and gave them the benefit of the doubt. It was amazing to me how disrespectful most of the people were, not only to the Judge and courtroom, but to the whole process.
When it was my turn the Judge read my infraction which was “fail to stop at stop sign.” I think he was reading the officer sworn statement while I was talking but he was not reading it out loud so I am not sure. He said I had a perfect record (which I do) and asked me if I would like to contest, defer, or mitigate. I said “contest.” He said “Are you sure, you have a perfect record” (implying he would defer if I asked him to.) I told him I was sure and he read the officer statement.
To make a long story short I think the Judge was actually a little harder on me than he was on the other defendants that day. I don’t know why. I assume it was because the officer’s sworn statement made me look so “evil” (with the “high rate of speed” business) and that it was just a simple mistake the officer made by citing the wrong RCW. He asked me what I thought happened and I honestly told him that I think the officer made an honest mistake. I told him honestly that when I was stopped the officer said I was speeding and I didn’t realize the ticket was for a stop sign until I got home as the officer didn’t say anything about a stop sign or a traffic signal when I was stopped. I told him when I requested discovery I was surprised to read that it was a stop light issue and not a stop sign as the infraction was written. I told him I never saw the officer until he raced up behind me with his lights on 3300 feet away from where the alleged infraction occurred. I told him I do not know where the officer was or which direction he thought I was going and the statement didn’t clarify. I told him I had a picture of the intersection to show there was no stop sign, but instead it was a traffic signal. He asked to see the picture which I showed him. When he looked at the picture he said “The court finds this picture relevant.” He held up the picture and asked if I took it and I told him yes, I took it yesterday. He said that he finds “Infraction not committed” and “Have a good afternoon.” I thanked him and walked out of the courtroom.
The lesson I learned from this (if any) is that if you committed the infraction, just pay the ticket (as I did 10 years ago with my only other ticket.) If you did not commit the infraction then contest. You have nothing to lose by contesting vs Mitigate or Defer (other than your time and stress.) Never mitigate as there is no advantage to that over contesting.
Thank you very much to those that helped and offered advice. I really appreciate it.
Re: Stop Sign Violation at an Intersection with Traffic Signal
Seems to me the officer must have been traveling in the opposite direction, and was, I don't know maybe watching the light from his mirror maybe?
He states in the discovery that he had to turn around in order to pursue your vehicle.
So I would be questioning his direction of travel.
As well I would want to know, How he managed to see the changing of the light and your vehicles position within, ahead, or beyond the intersection? All while driving his own vehicle in a safe manner doing what sounds like an average speed of 40-45 mph.
If it turns out he was ahead of you and witnessed this incident, than again he would have had to do all while watching you in his mirror, And I question how he was able to be sure of the light and your vehicles position in the road.
He says he had to turn his cruiser around to give chase and this would mean at your supposed "High Rate of Speed" he would have had some considerable distance to cover to do any catching up required. And I'd question his ability to identify you personally out of the other cars on the road. He would have had to have lost sight with your vehicle at some point and that right there opens up a small window of doubt.
And as I'm sure you already know the court is set up to find you guilty beyond a shadow of any doubt. Well he can't deny that it is very possible that the chances of another car similar to yours could easily have just turned onto the road (Like you) While the actual target he was forced to take his eyes off of for even a second was flying by so fast he whipped right by you and was gone leaving you to take the fall for his evasive driving behavior.
Not saying it is likely by any means I am saying it is possible. So you'd need to prove he lost eye contact with the suspects vehicle, and then mistook your similar looking vehicle for his suspect.
I mean how could it have possibly been you? You have a blemish free driving record, You always make it a point to obey all laws on the road, you respect law enforcement and the court system and you have worked diligently to maintain your impeccable driving record. You are also the type to own your mistakes and had this have been your vehicle and your doing you would gladly throw yourself at the mercy of the court. But just can't stand by idle while this great deal of injustice is bestowed upon you. Lol
In all seriousness I'd demand politely that all charges be dropped, as NOT committed.
Not sure about the stop sign thing though, Good luck with that.
I guess I was a little late here, Well congrats for the victory. Sounds like you had a real cool judge. They're not the norm so be happy for that.
Re: Stop Sign Violation at an Intersection with Traffic Signal
WOW! Thanks for the narrative. I'm sure it will help MANY folks who come here and read it. Good job, BTW. It feels pretty good when you do your homework, you're prepared, and you walk out a winner, doesn't it? Congrats, again.
Barry