ExpertLaw.com Forums

Washington, Lewis County LIDAR Ticket

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page
Page 1 of 2 1 2 Next LastLast
  • 08-03-2012, 09:27 AM
    goomba
    Washington, Lewis County LIDAR Ticket
    My question involves a traffic ticket from the state of: Washington, Lewis County, Chehalis

    Hello,

    I was recently driving south to Portland and was cited going over the posted speed limit on a section of I5 near Chehalis. The officer got me with her laser gun. I have obtained the officer's statement but am still awaiting the SMD Certification document from the Prosecuting office. I have browsed similar cases to mine on this forum and some mention that the officer's statement must include a line about supervised equipment testing by a certified individual prior to starting the shift.

    Would someone with some more legal experience be willing to look over the officers statement I have linked below and see if you notice any other blatant loopholes? I would really appreciate any advice for building my case.

    Best

    Page 1: http://i49.tinypic.com/2d9428z.jpg
    Page 2: http://i49.tinypic.com/rhnxqe.jpg
  • 08-04-2012, 07:52 AM
    PTPD22
    Re: Washington, Lewis County LIDAR Ticket
    You may have a couple of points to use to contest this citation but nothing that I see as a "slam-dunk." The officer does not state his specific location nor give any statement regarding visual obstructions or other traffic around you (this second point will carry much less weight with a LIDAR than it would with a radar SMD). You will also want to check that the SMD was actually calibrated within the two year period mentioned in the officer's statement.

    Other than that, nothing is jumping out at me as a grounds to contest. However, I am very surprised that you have "LIDAR" in the title of your post and a certain, thoroughly repudiated, militant poster has let nearly 24 hrs go by without posting some asinine comment or advice.
  • 08-05-2012, 02:27 PM
    BrendanjKeegan
    Re: Washington, Lewis County LIDAR Ticket
    There is nothing linking an NOI to this report. For all we know, this report could be for an entirely different defendant. There is nothing that identifies you or the NOI on this report. Move to dismiss as there is no proof that this report belongs to your case.

    Also, Hillock and Nicholson signed the SMD certification before the actual testing took place. How did they know that it was going to pass? Move to dismiss as there is no testimony to the SMD's accuracy after the fact. https://fortress.wa.gov/wsp/smdsearc...tionPrint/2543

    Move to dismiss due to indefinite time. The officer says that he checked the calibration when he received the unit and when he turned it in. As far as I know, traffic officer's receive their SMDs and normally keep them for a long period of time: anywhere from months to years. Unless the prosecution has evidence to show that the SMD accuracy checks were performed within a reasonable amount of time (as required by Spokane v. Knight) this case should be dismissed.
  • 08-05-2012, 05:18 PM
    PTPD22
    Re: Washington, Lewis County LIDAR Ticket
    Quote:

    Quoting BrendanjKeegan
    View Post
    There is nothing linking an NOI to this report. For all we know, this report could be for an entirely different defendant. There is nothing that identifies you or the NOI on this report. Move to dismiss as there is no proof that this report belongs to your case.

    Right. I can't believe I missed that. The officer just says "the attached" NOI. Without identifying the NOI by number, it can't be considered incorporated by reference. This should have a good chance of getting it dismissed.

    Quote:

    Quoting BrendanjKeegan
    View Post
    Move to dismiss due to indefinite time. The officer says that he checked the calibration when he received the unit and when he turned it in. As far as I know, traffic officer's receive their SMDs and normally keep them for a long period of time: anywhere from months to years. Unless the prosecution has evidence to show that the SMD accuracy checks were performed within a reasonable amount of time (as required by Spokane v. Knight) this case should be dismissed.

    This is of course worth a shot. But, I strongly suspect that the judge will allow officer testimony that he checks out and returns the SMD at the beginning and end of his shift. Your first two points are much stronger.
  • 08-05-2012, 10:14 PM
    davidmcbeth3
    Re: Washington, Lewis County LIDAR Ticket
    what, no scope alignment was performed? he said he did it per manufacturer's guidelines ... I think that they have a scope alignment test...

    right? also never said he was trained in this SMD...big issue there..and the tests performed are not "calibration tests" I don't think


    also, go check the range used in the checking ... I'll bet it does not conform to the "manufacturer's guidelines" ... as to distance(s) ..
  • 08-06-2012, 11:15 AM
    lostintime
    Re: Washington, Lewis County LIDAR Ticket
    Quote:

    Quoting PTPD22
    View Post
    You may have a couple of points to use to contest this citation but nothing that I see as a "slam-dunk." The officer does not state his specific location nor give any statement regarding visual obstructions or other traffic around you (this second point will carry much less weight with a LIDAR than it would with a radar SMD). You will also want to check that the SMD was actually calibrated within the two year period mentioned in the officer's statement.

    Other than that, nothing is jumping out at me as a grounds to contest. However, I am very surprised that you have "LIDAR" in the title of your post and a certain, thoroughly repudiated, militant poster has let nearly 24 hrs go by without posting some asinine comment or advice.

    414ft. Refreshing to see it being used in a fair manner.

    As for NOI - seems like a moot point. The officer can simply say "this was the guy", and voila.
  • 08-06-2012, 12:12 PM
    blewis
    Re: Washington, Lewis County LIDAR Ticket
    Quote:

    Quoting lostintime
    View Post
    As for NOI - seems like a moot point. The officer can simply say "this was the guy", and voila.

    And voilą -- another useless comment -- WHEN, EXACTLY, do you think the officer is going to say, "This was the guy"? I've asked you before to PLEASE STOP POSTING WHEN YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT! But, apparently, you're just going to go on with your inane advice and comments.

    Barry
  • 08-06-2012, 01:58 PM
    goomba
    Re: Washington, Lewis County LIDAR Ticket
    Thank you guys for your replies. That is an interesting argument regarding a lack of specific notice of infraction reference in the statement. Is this a worthwhile argument to note to the judge? It seems as if this statement originates from a template commonly used by the officer. Is there a citeable law that states that NOI must be explicitly noted in the officers statement rather than simply referenced as attached?

    I am still awaiting SMD certification documents and will post/verify upon receipt.
  • 08-06-2012, 07:20 PM
    jjb
    Re: Washington, Lewis County LIDAR Ticket
    Quote:

    I have obtained the officer's statement but am still awaiting the SMD Certification document from the Prosecuting office.
    Likely the SMD certification is on file with the court, if that is the case the Prosecuting office won't be sending you the document. You might want to call the clerk and check. Brendan posted a link to the online version but it is always good practice to check the official copy which is usually on file with the court.
  • 08-06-2012, 10:57 PM
    lostintime
    Re: Washington, Lewis County LIDAR Ticket
    Quote:

    Quoting blewis
    View Post
    And voilą -- another useless comment -- WHEN, EXACTLY, do you think the officer is going to say, "This was the guy"? I've asked you before to PLEASE STOP POSTING WHEN YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT! But, apparently, you're just going to go on with your inane advice and comments.

    Barry

    Having read this forum enough, it seems like almost all errors on a ticket/discovery/traffic survey are forgiven by the court. Wrong gender, wrong survey this, wrong survey that, wrong DL number, wrong car color, wrong car model, wrong ethnicity, etc. Obviously certain errors carry more weight - but there seems to be a lot of leniency with errors.

    It's stated the defendant was idenfied by : Washington's Drivers License/ID Card. If the distance was on his ticket (he hasn't stated if it is or not)...and it reads 414.0 ft as well, is the judge really going to think it was someone else? Probably not.

    Is it stated anywhere in WA law that the NOI# must be included in the sworn statement/discovery affidavit...? Probably not. Usually when these things are not addressed (like LIDAR distance), it's there to give them a buffer zone for potential error.

    By the way, nice touch on including the accent mark with voilą. Having minored in French, I can appreciate that.
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page
Page 1 of 2 1 2 Next LastLast
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:44 PM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.4
Copyright © 2023 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
Copyright © 2004 - 2018 ExpertLaw.com, All Rights Reserved