ExpertLaw.com Forums

Dismissal of a California Speeding Ticket Based on the Officer's No-Show

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst Previous 1 2 3 Next LastLast
  • 07-03-2017, 06:01 PM
    rtg20
    Re: How I Beat My California Speeding Ticket
    Quote:

    Quoting Lizard
    View Post
    A couple questions:
    1) How do you do trial de novo?
    2) What was your defense when you did trial by written declaration?

    1. Having received notification that I lost the trial by written declaration, I filled in a form to request a TDN, and filed it with the court.

    2. All in the book; I argued that the speed measurement was wrong because in order for the speed measurement to be accurate, the beams of light emitted by the lidar speed measuring device have to hit exactly the same point on the car. Given that I was driving down a hill at the time, I don't think that the officer was supporting the lidar device (e.g. with a tripod) when he used it, and he was several hundred feet away from me when he caught me, this is actually extremely unlikely. Check out Josh Bloch's 'Lowdown on Lidar' (also cited in my book).
  • 07-03-2017, 06:40 PM
    jk
    Re: How I Beat My California Speeding Ticket
    I sure hope you aren't selling your book. Your "understanding" of lidar speedn
    detectors is poor at best.

    You should check out the specs on the lidar used and calculate just how large the "spot" was. The minimal error caused by not hitting the "exact point" (if you calculate the actual size of the spot you will realize how invalid your claims are) will not cause an error large enough to make a difference. You should also realize that there are several hundred, at least, measurements taken during a speed check, all in less than half a second, which allows for a very accurate measurement.
  • 07-03-2017, 06:52 PM
    cdwjava
    Re: How I Beat My California Speeding Ticket
    And, of course, your lidar argument is entirely untested because the officer did not show and the matter was dropped. Not to mention the fact that a tripod is NOT required for the use of a lidar! I have no idea where you got that impression.
  • 07-03-2017, 07:07 PM
    rtg20
    Re: How I Beat My California Speeding Ticket
    Quote:

    Quoting jk
    View Post
    I sure hope you aren't selling your book. Your "understanding" of lidar speedn
    detectors is poor at best.

    You should check out the specs on the lidar used and calculate just how large the "spot" was. The minimal error caused by not hitting the "exact point" (if you calculate the actual size of the spot you will realize how invalid your claims are) will not cause an error large enough to make a difference. You should also realize that there are several hundred, at least, measurements taken during a speed check, all in less than half a second, which allows for a very accurate measurement.

    I did look up specs and calculated a beam width of ~10 feet for my situation.

    Lidar *can* be accurate, but the devices have to be used properly. The CHP publish an operating manual and the lidar device manufacturers publish operating instructions, too. I obtained copies and the officer did NOT follow the instructions. Accordingly, the measurement can't be expected to be accurate.

    cdwjava you are correct, argument is untested. But I still won. :-)

    It's true that motorists can be cited by officers who don't use tripods. However, that fact alone has no bearing on the accuracy of the measurement. And the documentation I read recommends that supports are used.
  • 07-03-2017, 10:53 PM
    jk
    Re: How I Beat My California Speeding Ticket
    So a beam width of 10 feet? Your statement of the light "must hit
    the exact same point on the car" fails if the beam width is 10 feet. A car is about 6' wide.

    I don't know the distance involved for you but to have a beam width of 10 feet you would have to be at least 700 yards (at the max allowable divergence of 5 milliradian (per federal rule) . 1 milliraidian @ 100 yards results in approx 3.6" ). You said you you were several hundred feet away. At 600 feet (200 yards) the beam would be about 36". (3.6 x 5 x 2) at the max allowable divergence. Your argument of hitting the exact same spot fails at that distance as well.

    And realize that is at the max divergence as allowed by law. The actual beam width is likely smaller.

    LTI (a lidar smd manufacturer) states their beam width is about 3 feet at 1000 feet.

    If your book is as imprecise as your calculations, well, let's just say it wouldn't be worth the sales price if it were free.

    As to you winning. You got lucky. The cop didn't show. If
    the cop showed, using the arguments you've provided so far, there is no reason to believe you would have won.
  • 07-03-2017, 11:33 PM
    rtg20
    Re: How I Beat My California Speeding Ticket
    Quote:

    Quoting jk
    View Post
    So a beam width of 10 feet? Your statement of the light "must hit
    the exact same point on the car" fails if the beam width is 10 feet. A car is about 6' wide.

    10 feet wide is almost as wide as the lanes on the freeway - and I was ticketed at a relatively busy time. The measured speed might be for another car completely.

    10 feet really is very wide...the light could have bounced off any combination of the wing mirrors; top of the windshield; base of windshield; radiator; license plate. It's a huge source of error. If you don't want to buy my book, Google "Lowdown on Lidar" by Josh Bloch.

    Quote:

    Quoting jk
    View Post
    I don't know the distance involved for you but to have a beam width of 10 feet you would have to be at least 700 yards (at the max allowable divergence of 5 milliradian (per federal rule) . 1 milliraidian @ 100 yards results in approx 3.6" ). You said you you were several hundred feet away. At 600 feet (200 yards) the beam would be about 36". (3.6 x 5 x 2) at the max allowable divergence. Your argument of hitting the exact same spot fails at that distance as well.

    That's the whole point, the beam is so wide that's it's unrealistic to expect it to hit the same spot on the car, especially one being driven down a hill.

    I don't know the exact distance either, because neither the DA nor the CHP fully responded to my request for discovery. However, I estimate ~1000 ft or so.

    Quote:

    Quoting jk
    View Post
    And realize that is at the max divergence as allowed by law. The actual beam width is likely smaller.

    LTI (a lidar smd manufacturer) states their beam width is about 3 feet at 1000 feet.

    That will depend on how it's used.

    Quote:

    Quoting jk
    View Post
    If your book is as imprecise as your calculations, well, let's just say it wouldn't be worth the sales price if it were free.

    There's nothing wrong with my calculations, and they are all referenced. The problem is with the way the officers use the lidar devices.

    Quote:

    Quoting jk
    View Post
    As to you winning. You got lucky. The cop didn't show. If
    the cop showed, using the arguments you've provided so far, there is no reason to believe you would have won.

    It's true that my arguments are untested. It's also true that I was lucky that the cop didn't show.

    But the most important thing is that I won, and I feel one reason that I did was because I dragged the process out over nine months. All in the book. :-)
  • 07-03-2017, 11:41 PM
    cdwjava
    Re: How I Beat My California Speeding Ticket
    Fascinating that the professional defense bar has not uncovered this glaring flaw in the use of lidar that you claim to have discovered.

    I think you overestimate the strength of the claim you make. You also forget that radar trained officers are also trained in visual estimation, so regardless of the lidar they will also testify that they made a visual estimation of the speed of your vehicle (which was confirmed by their use of radar/lidar). So, I wouldn't count those chickens so fast.

    But, if all a person has is a Hail Mary and they do not need a guarantee of traffic school, why not go for the end zone in an all-or-nothing pass?
  • 07-04-2017, 12:28 AM
    Taxing Matters
    Re: How I Beat My California Speeding Ticket
    Quote:

    Quoting rtg20
    View Post

    On trial day, I arrived ready to argue that the speed measurement had been obtained without any regard for CHP procedure. The officer no-showed (not sure if the DA told him not to appear) so I won. :-)

    You are fortunate that the officer did not show and the court gave you a win by default. Had you proceeded with your argument you likely would have lost. CHP procedure is not law and the failure of the officer to follow CHP procedure is not a violation of your rights nor cause for dismissal of the charges against you. It seems though that your real argument was that the officer’s method of determining your speed was not reliable and you were planning to use the failure to follow CHP procedure as proof that the measurement was not reliable. That would not have succeeded. Just because the CHP procedure was not followed does not logically allow a conclusion that the speed measurement was not reliable. Rather, you would need to provide scientific evidence as to how lidar works, what steps must be done to get an accurate reading, and how what the officer did would result in the reading not being reliable. For that, you cannot simply point to CHP procedures or books on how lidar works. You must instead have an expert witness testify to those things. That is what the rules of evidence require. So even if you might have been right that officer’s reading was not reliable, you likely would have lost because you didn’t know the rules of evidence and didn’t have an expert witness to get the evidence you needed before the court to prove your point. This is one of the reasons that pro se litigants tend to fail in court. They screw up on procedure.
  • 07-04-2017, 02:05 AM
    rtg20
    Re: How I Beat My California Speeding Ticket
    Quote:

    Quoting cdwjava
    View Post
    Fascinating that the professional defense bar has not uncovered this glaring flaw in the use of lidar that you claim to have discovered.

    I don't claim to have discovered anything. My book is abundantly referenced. Even the lidar manufacturer documentation alludes to the aforementioned shortcomings that daily use of their equipment entails. And the professional defense bar know all about this stuff. It's even referred to in attorney David Brown's book, for example. (Published by Nolo.)

    Quote:

    Quoting cdwjava
    View Post
    I think you overestimate the strength of the claim you make.

    OK. It was untested.

    Quote:

    Quoting cdwjava
    View Post
    You also forget that radar trained officers are also trained in visual estimation, so regardless of the lidar they will also testify that they made a visual estimation of the speed of your vehicle (which was confirmed by their use of radar/lidar). So, I wouldn't count those chickens so fast.

    I did get info on this. The officer was tested for visual estimation at speeds significantly lower (40-50 mph, from memory) than the 70 mph limit on the freeway. No evidence at all that his visual estimation ability was tested at higher speeds. Neither was there evidence that visual estimation at lower speeds translates to higher speeds.
  • 07-04-2017, 02:15 AM
    cdwjava
    Re: How I Beat My California Speeding Ticket
    So, you obtained his training info and the syllabus used in his training course?

    When I was a training manager, I recall my officers being trained in visual estimation on freeway speeds as well as lower speeds, and there were a significant number of such estimations. And, since we are not talking about even +/- 2 MPH, we are talking about deviations of, perhaps, 5 MPH, I suspect the court would be comfortable with their estimation. I was not radar trained (though I was a collision investigator), so I do not have firsthand radar training experience, but, most of my officers were.
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst Previous 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