Advise on Challenging Based on Unconstitutionally Void for Vagueness
My question involves a traffic ticket from the state of: Washington State
Appreciate guidance on an infraction I received for violation of 46.61.688 reason by officer "Fail to wear safety belt". My issue with this citation is that I have a 1988 car (older but not old enough) that has the lap and chest restraint combined. I did in fact have my seatbelt on but my chest restraint does not always retract fully (again, 1988 car). I had a slight gap on the chest restraint that caused the state patrol to pull me over and question me. She indicated the State of Washington has a zero tolerance or leniency around the proper use of a seatbelt only after I showed her clearly that she witnessed my seatbelt was secured. So I really question the law and intent when it comes to properly adjusted and securely fastened manner as indicated in 46.61.688. I was not able to quickly assess or determine the definition within that regulation to identify what "properly adjusted or securely fastened" would mean. In my mind that chest restraint would have still functioned properly upon an impact so how is it that I would understand what the State of Washington would deam "properly adjusted or securely fastened". In review I found that it could be challenged for unconstitutionally void for vagueness and the Washinton State Supreme Court shared that the Washington Seat belt law is hardly a model of clarity. It is also a statute I believe that it is deamed unconstitutional if it fails to provide fair notice; if the standards to which a citizen must confirm are so inaccessible that an average person could not be expected to discover them by reasonable search efforts, then the statute does not provide the requisite notice.
I understand I could request a mitigation hearing but then I admit guilt and would very likely get a reduced fee and this is not on my driving record to affect my insurance; however, this is based on principle to me and the fact that I did wear my seatbelt and I was inconveniently pulled over and questioned to the factual nature of that. When discovered I was wearing it, it moved to the proper wearing of it that she questioned me. I do not feel that, the state of washington required to with a proponderance of evidence, be able to uphold this ticket.
Request: Legal advice around this matter whether it is reasonable to pursue this or not? Appreciate your time and response around this matter.
Re: Advise on Challenging Based on Unconstitutionally Void for Vagueness
If the principle is important enough to you, you'd probably do better working with your state elected representatives to fix the statute.
Re: Advise on Challenging Based on Unconstitutionally Void for Vagueness
It is not unconstitutional at all. The following case illustrates the WA courts finding any person of reasonable intelligence should be able to find seatbelt manufacture standards by a simple search of the internet. The case noted was for "federal standard 208". In your case the issue is "federal standard 209". I suggest you pay the ticket and not make a fool of yourself in court.
http://biotech.law.lsu.edu/cases/pp/ECKBLAD.htm
http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/49/571.209
http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/49/571.209
Re: Advise on Challenging Based on Unconstitutionally Void for Vagueness
Quote:
Quoting
Toutle
advice around this matter whether it is reasonable to pursue this or not?
If you don’t mind making a court appearance, there’s really no downside to requesting a contested hearing. (Be sure to make a copy of the ticket front/back before mailing.) Nobody can properly advise you without knowing what the officer wrote in her affidavit--which you will receive after filing for discovery. If you haven’t already, read the sticky thread Procedural Guide to Traffic Tickets in Washington State for information on how to proceed.