Failure to Obey Stop Sign, with No Stop Line

My question involves a traffic ticket from the state of: CT
I received a ticket for Failure to obey a stop sign (14-301). The officer said I failed to stop. That is not my issue. My issue is with the wording of the statute and the absence of a stop line. This street in my town is abused by the civilian Police Commission who by state statute is the traffic authority. They have put six stop signs in approx one mile. The most ridiculous one is for traffic traveling in one direction at a cul-de-sac side street that has 5 houses on it. Thus allowing these 5 home owners to turn left into their street w/o stopping. Anyway back to my question. Statute 14-301 reads " (c) The driver of a vehicle shall stop in obedience to a stop sign at such clearly marked stop line or lines as may be established by the traffic authority having jurisdiction or, in the absence of such line or lines, shall stop in obedience to a stop sign at the entrance to a through highway and shall yield the right-of-way to vehicles not so obliged to stop which are within the intersection or approaching so closely as to constitute an immediate hazard."

I was traveling on the main road and said stop sign is at a cul-de-sac. There is no stop line but only a stop sign. Since I was on the through highway and not at the entrance to the through highway was I not obligated to stop according to the statute? I have mailed my ticket in not guilty and am awaiting a court date. Should I meet with the prosecutor and state my case and hope he nolles the ticket? If he refuses should I ask for a continuance and consult an attorney? Also the officer listed me as the owner of the vehicle when the registration clearly lists my parents as the registered owners. Thanks for your help.

You need to research the definition of “highway” in the state traffic codes.

Here is the definition of highway (14-1) (40) "Highway" includes any state or other public highway, road, street, avenue, alley, driveway, parkway or place, under the control of the state or any political subdivision of the state, dedicated, appropriated or opened to public travel or other use

May issue is with "through highway" form webster.com Definition of THROUGH
1a (1) —used as a function word to indicate movement into at one side or point and out at another and especially the opposite side of <drove a nail through the board> (2) : by way of <left through the door> (3) —used as a function word to indicate passage from one end or boundary to another <a highway through the forest> <a road through the desert> (4) : without stopping for : past <drove through a red light>
To me I was on the through highway the cul-de-sac is on one side a T if you will.

You're offering the type of argument that is bound to either frustrate any prosecutor who may otherwise be willing to work with you on a deal. Or force him to want to take you to trial. Why?

Simply because while most prosecuting attorneys would rather avoid a trial for a simple traffic matter, your trial, and with as invalid an argument as you are using, will be over very quickly.

Run those two sentences through your head a few times and see what you can come up with... Good luck!

According to the Uniform Traffic Code (couldn't copy only have reader). A through highway is one that requires vehicles to enter from another street. With that definition I believe that CT 14-301(c) requires a stop line for stop sign to be enforced on any street other then those intersecting a through highway. A side note I noticed that the officer for location only listed the Street I was traveling on. Clearly says if intersection specify. I may be trying to be technical but wanted to know what other thought about the stop line mentioned in statute. Thanks for your help. What would you suggest I say to prosecutor? In CT they will meet with anyone on day of appearance before going before judge. They have alot of power to dismiss sometimes for a charitable donation.

If you can get away with a dismissal for a charitable donation then by all means, that would be ideal... I would expect some sort of reduction to a non moving violation along with some sort of fine. But to go in expecting that the prosecuting attorney would agree that a stop is not required where a stop sign is clearly posted, and only based on semantics? Not a chance.

Anyone else have an opinion? First ticket. What do I say to prosecutor? Does it matter that intersection is not on ticket or me listed as owner when parents own car?

- - - Updated - - -

Quote:

---

Quoting That Guy

---

If you can get away with a dismissal for a charitable donation then by all means, that would be ideal... I would expect some sort of reduction to a non moving violation along with some sort of fine. But to go in expecting that the prosecuting attorney would agree that a stop is not required where a stop sign is clearly posted, and only based on semantics? Not a chance.

---

Read the statute again: Statute 14-301 reads " (c) The driver of a vehicle shall stop in obedience to a stop sign at such clearly marked stop line or lines as may be established by the traffic authority having jurisdiction or, in the absence of such line or lines, shall stop in obedience to a stop sign at the entrance to a through highway and shall yield the right-of-way to vehicles not so obliged to stop which are within the intersection or approaching so closely as to constitute an immediate hazard."

Quote:

---

Quoting KBD627

---

Read the statute again:

---

I've read it once. That is enough times for me to see that your silly argument is not going to save the day for you.

But then again, you're obviously pretty confident in the validity of your interpretation and that's why you're still around waiting for more opinions.

Seriously though, by your definition, no one is under any obligation to stop as they enter a highway from a driveway, a parking lot, an alley.... Because often times, those are not considered "through-ways". Worst yet, in most of those situations there would be no posted "STOP" sign. Yet EVERY driver is obligated to STOP.

In your situation, even you admitted to the presence of a STOP sign. And yet your defense you are not required to stop because a cul-de-sac is not a "through highway"????

That would be 14-247 Failure to grant right of way exiting private driveway

Quote:

---

Quoting KBD627

---

That would be 14-247 Failure to grant right of way exiting private driveway

---

Hook, line & sinker.... That is exactly where I hoped you would go....

A "private driveway" is not a "through way" <---> (a cul-de-sac is not a "through way")
Yet the law requires you to stop before entering the intersecting "through highway" <---> (similarly, the law requires you to stop at the entrance to the intersecting through highway)!

The same basic principle applies... You enter one from the other, you MUST stop at the entrance to the other

Also note, I included "alley" in my examples... Where did we see that before?

Exactly, under the definition of "highway" thereby confirming my previous point that the same basic principle applies.

Don't believe me though... Contest it, take it to trial and try to convince the judge that, by your interpretation, you don't have to stop.

I'd wish you luck but luck alone won't do you much good!

- - - Updated - - -

You asked for a confirmation receipt on your PM, I'm gonna do better. I'm going to post your message in its entirety. That way those who know how hollow brained you are would also know that you're a spineless coward!

Quote:

---

Quoting KBD627

---

You are a pompous jerk. I read lots of your posts and you have a pattern of obnoxiousness. You are either a wannabe cop or just a jerk. Either way stop posting to my question.
:cool:

---

I spent all that time disagreeing with everything you said and yet you thought I was gonna read ^that^ and think to myself "Hmmm, maybe he's right!".... Seriously?

Frankly, I didn't expect any better... You've made it way too obvious how desperate you are to win this one (probably because you're a big time loser), and sadly, you too obtuse to know what's good for you. I don't care how frustrated you are; mouthing off to the one person who took it upon himself to try and hold you back from making a fool out of yourself, makes you a hateful ass!

Last 2 points: (1) I am not a wanna be cop.... or a real cop for that matter. And (2) you don't get to dictate where, when, why, how or what I post!

Quote:

---

Quoting That Guy

---

[I] I'm going to post your message in its entirety.I spent all that time disagreeing with everything you said and yet you thought I was gonna read ^that^ and think to myself "Hmmm, maybe he's right!".... Seriously?

(1) I am not a wanna be cop.... or a real cop for that matter. And (2) you don't get to dictate where, when, why, how or what I post!

---

Thanks for not denying "you are a jerk" you confirm my initial read on you. What kind of jerk posts a private message to a forum?? I'm shocked that the admin of the forum allows this. You should be banned for doing that. Then again what other life do you have? My guess is you live in your mother's/parent's basement. You probably are such a loser that you never venture outside and only goggle traffic laws then copy and paste to this forum. Are you even old enough to drive?? Good-bye moron. This is my last post to this forum. I've obtained a real legal professional. When I found this forum I thought real lawyers posted here. You proved that only wannabe morons answer questions!!!!

Quote:

---

Quoting KBD627

---

Thanks for not denying "you are a jerk" you confirm my initial read on you. What kind of jerk posts a private message to a forum?? I'm shocked that the admin of the forum allows this. You should be banned for doing that. Then again what other life do you have? My guess is you live in your mother's/parent's basement. You probably are such a loser that you never venture outside and only goggle traffic laws then copy and paste to this forum. Are you even old enough to drive?? Good-bye moron. This is my last post to this forum. I've obtained a real legal professional. When I found this forum I thought real lawyers posted here. You proved that only wannabe morons answer questions!!!!

---

While you claim "No need [for me] to post this private message as [you] already did", you did not post the same message you sent me. Not only does that make you a LIAR... It proves you are a COWARD as well!

Here is the PM that you sent me, in its entirety:

Quote:

---

Quoting KBD627

---

Thanks for nothing you phucking idiot. No need to post this private message as I already did.
"Thanks for not denying "you are a jerk" you confirm my initial read on you. What kind of jerk posts a private message to a forum?? I'm shocked that the admin of the forum allows this. You should be banned for doing that. Then again what other life do you have? My guess is you live in your mother's/parent's basement. You probably are such a loser that you never venture outside and only goggle traffic laws then copy and paste to this forum. Are you even old enough to drive?? Good-bye moron. This is my last post to this forum. I've obtained a real legal professional. When I found this forum I thought real lawyers posted here. You proved that only wannabe morons answer questions!!!!" Don't know what you are , but clearly you are neither a lawyer, policeman or court employee. I figure you are just a bitter person who hates everyone and you just wants to be superior to everyone. I will never post or look at this forum again so have your way with your response or get the admins to delete my post (if your are not indeed the admin). Either way GO PHUCK YOURSELF!!!!

---

Remind me again, who are you to judge me? Oh that's right... The dim-wit douche-bag who couldn't understand the word STOP posted on a big red sign! I'm not offended by your senseless drivel!