Failure to Stop Ticket, VC 22450(A)
My question involves a traffic ticket from the state of: California
I was issued a citation last month for 22450(a). This is the code for running a stop sign in California. When the officer told me I ran a stop sign I looked around for a stop sign and there was not one in sight, since I was new to the area I thought I might have legitimately blown through a sign I didn't see. I reviewed the citation and went back to the intersection the officer wrote in the "location of violation(s)" box. The officer listed two streets that intersect. The intersection is controlled by a stoplight, and the light was green when I entered and exited the intersection in question.
I have sent an informal request for discovery to the issuing agency & the DA. If I do not get a response I was thinking of doing a TBD and just stating the intersection is controlled by a stoplight and to be guilty of 22450(a) a stop sign would need to be present.
Is it possible to have a pretrial hearing on a discovery request when doing a TBD?
Any other advice you can offer to help me through this would be appreciated!
Re: Failure to Stop 22450 (A)
What did you seek in the discovery request?
And, unless the citing officer amends the citation to something more appropriate (such as VC 21453(a)) you should prevail on a VC 22450 citation for a stoplight.
Seems a rather grievous error for the officer to have made to confuse VC 22450 and VC 21453, but if so, it should be an easy one for you to prevail upon.
Re: Failure to Stop 22450 (A)
Quote:
Quoting
cdwjava
What did you seek in the discovery request?.
I requested the notes on the back of the ticket and the video from his body & dash camera. I am curious is he will say he got the VC wrong on the ticket OR if he will say the intersection he wrote down was incorrect and that I ran a stop sign at a different location.
If my discovery request is ignored I dont see how I can defend myself any differently than I stated in my OP. When he pull me over he clearly said I ran a stop sign.
Re: Failure to Stop 22450 (A)
The issue is where were you REALLY when he observed you. What is written on the ticket means SQUAT. The ticket is not evidence. If the intersection was one with a stop sign that you ran, that is what he will testify to in court. If it is one without a stop sign, and the charge is not amended, you have a chance of beating it.
Re: Failure to Stop 22450 (A)
Quote:
Quoting
flyingron
The issue is where were you REALLY when he observed you. What is written on the ticket means SQUAT. The ticket is not evidence. If the intersection was one with a stop sign that you ran, that is what he will testify to in court. If it is one without a stop sign, and the charge is not amended, you have a chance of beating it.
I am trying to find out where I was and where the officer was when he observed me through discovery. I have heard that discovery requests are often ignored. If my request is ignored how can I defend myself? Can the defendant make pretrial motions in a TBD?
To the part of your reply where you say "chance of beating it" I would like to know how I can still have a chance of being convicted under those conditions?
Re: Failure to Stop 22450 (A)
Quote:
Quoting
Bbonez
I am trying to find out where I was and where the officer was when he observed me through discovery. I have heard that discovery requests are often ignored. If my request is ignored how can I defend myself? Can the defendant make pretrial motions in a TBD?
To the part of your reply where you say "chance of beating it" I would like to know how I can still have a chance of being convicted under those conditions?
Discovery can be frustrating. Since in CA traffic cites are filed with the court (as a matter of statute) and not with the DA, the DA most often ignores or declines to provide discovery because they do not have any information on the offense. However, most counties will respond with a letter suggesting the defendant make the request with the law enforcement agency directly. And, while state law does not mandate law enforcement agencies to comply with discovery requests MOST (but not all) agencies will do so even without direction from the DA.
The location of the offense should be on the citation. THAT should be the location where the stop sign was located - if there was one. The notes on the back may well give some indication of where the officer was and what he observed, but keep in mind that the notes there are to refresh the officer's memory and not intended to be comprehensible to others. So, there may be a chance that you will not understand the shorthand or that it might appear incomplete.
If no discovery is provided by either the DA or the agency, and you have made a proper request at least to the DA, you can ask the court to compel discovery.
As for pretiral motions in a TBD? Not that I am aware of. The TBD is just that, a written declaration. You make your case in writing (which would seem to be that the location indicated on the citation has a stop LIGHT and not a stop SIGN, and therefore the elements of VC 22450 have not been met) and then request a trial de novo if you lose. Why you might lose, I cannot say. But, it's possible that the officer will write something different - like a different location for the observation - and you might not prevail. Though such a scenario might result in grounds for appeal, but that's a different issue.
IF you were to lose, you would want to request that new trial ASAP because there is a time limit in which you have to make it.
I am sure there shall be others who will post here with additional info on the TBWD and discovery issues.
Re: Failure to Stop 22450 (A)
You should assume the location given on the citation is the one when the offense is alleged to have occurred. Your TBD should state you did not run any stop signs, and that the particular intersection noted on the citation does not even have a stop sign. You should prevail.
If you sent your discovery request to the police agency for which the citing officer works, they should respond. They are in fact required by law to respond in infractions. If they don't, it's actually a good sign. The officer may have realized he made an error - whatever it was - and will pursue it no further. If they don't respond AND you are convicted in TBD, call the court and ask for the statement submitted by the officer. That will tell you all you need to know for trial de novo.
Things are looking good.
Re: Failure to Stop 22450 (A)
Quote:
Quoting
zeljo
If you sent your discovery request to the police agency for which the citing officer works, they should respond. They are in fact required by law to respond in infractions.
What statute states this?
While I agree that most agencies shall offer up discovery, I fail to see where PC 1054 et seq. mandates this from the law enforcement agency employing the citing officer. Is there some other section or some recent case law that spells this out?
Re: Failure to Stop 22450 (A)
I can hardly be any clearer that PEN1054 is the right and the only way to request and provide discovery... not just an option out there. I have done this many time over the last 10-15 years and the one time they failed to respond the cop didn't even show for the trial. If the agency does not respond in an infraction case, the defendant may well move for the dismissal of the case... there is no obligation whatsoever to seek a court order for discovery first.
1054.5.
(a) No order requiring discovery shall be made in criminal cases except as provided in this chapter. This chapter shall be the only means by which the defendant may compel the disclosure or production of information from prosecuting attorneys, law enforcement agencies which investigated or prepared the case against the defendant, or any other persons or agencies which the prosecuting attorney or investigating agency may have employed to assist them in performing their duties.
(b) Before a party may seek court enforcement of any of the disclosures required by this chapter, the party shall make an informal request of opposing counsel for the desired materials and information. If within 15 days the opposing counsel fails to provide the materials and information requested, the party may seek a court order. Upon a showing that a party has not complied with Section 1054.1 or 1054.3 and upon a showing that the moving party complied with the informal discovery procedure provided in this subdivision, a court may make any order necessary to enforce the provisions of this chapter, including, but not limited to, immediate disclosure, contempt proceedings, delaying or prohibiting the testimony of a witness or the presentation of real evidence, continuance of the matter, or any other lawful order. Further, the court may advise the jury of any failure or refusal to disclose and of any untimely disclosure.
Re: Failure to Stop 22450 (A)
Bbonez: You're making this too complicated. Don't worry about discovery right now. Do a TBD and defend against the charge on the citation, that being running a stop sign (22450(a)) at this particular intersection. Simply plead not guilty and provide a pic of the intersection being controlled by a light and not a sign. You should be acquitted.
Re: Failure to Stop Ticket, VC 22450(A)
I received dash cam and body cam footage in response to my request for discovery. *They also let me know the officer will be the only person testifying and he made no written notes pertaining to the citation. *I sent in my TBWD and just stated the intersection isn't controlled by a stop sign and attached some pictures. If I am found guilty I will request a trial de novo. *The video footage I received proves the officer never saw me in violation of the charge he cited me for.*
Re: Failure to Stop Ticket, VC 22450(A)
Good job. You got this.
Exposing corrupt cops is pretty fun.
Re: Failure to Stop Ticket, VC 22450(A)
Quote:
Quoting
acai
Good job. You got this.
Exposing corrupt cops is pretty fun.
Overly dramatic much? :rolleyes:
An error (i.e. the wrong code section) is hardly a "corrupt" act.
Re: Failure to Stop Ticket, VC 22450(A)
Quote:
Quoting
acai
Good job. You got this.
Exposing corrupt cops is pretty fun.
Making an error as to related code sections isn't "corruption." It's just a mistake, if you want you can ascribe it to stupidity.
Re: Failure to Stop Ticket, VC 22450(A)
Quote:
Quoting
flyingron
Making an error as to related code sections isn't "corruption." It's just a mistake, if you want you can ascribe it to stupidity.
I dont belive there was an error in code section, the video shows me going through the intersection in question during a solid green light. If the officer made a clerical mistake it was on the location of violation.
Re: Failure to Stop Ticket, VC 22450(A)
Quote:
Quoting
Jim Kozlovich
Bbonez: You're making this too complicated. Don't worry about discovery right now. Do a TBD and defend against the charge on the citation, that being running a stop sign (22450(a)) at this particular intersection. Simply plead not guilty and provide a pic of the intersection being controlled by a light and not a sign. You should be acquitted.
I submitted my TBD and stated the intersection has no stop sign and included pictures. I was found guilty. I requested a trial de novo and got a copy of the officer's TBD at the courthouse today. The officer is claiming the violation happened at a different intersection. He also put "I could see the limit line and stop sign from my position. As the (My Car) reached the intersection (new intersection name here), it failed to stop for the marked stop sign and limit line. The intersection is clearly marked with a limit line and stop sign"
My issue with this statement is the new intersection the officer is claiming doesn't have a limit line, it has a wide crosswalk (about 12 feet wide). From the view of his dashcam you can see me roll through the 2nd line but obviously can not see me when I was on the near side of the crosswalk where I was required to stop. Now I can see why I was found guilty, if the judge took the officers word for it that it had a limit line and saw the video of me going through the line.*
I have sent an email to the sergeant in charge of traffic with the department, I hope I can speak with him regarding this incident.*
@ Jim Kozlovich FYI This happened in your county
Re: Failure to Stop Ticket, VC 22450(A)
If you did make a stop before the crosswalk, go for Trial de Novo and testify so explicitly. If the cop testifies again that he "saw the limit line", call him on it, and show the video as proof. Your argument should be: if he doesn't remember the limit line, he can't remember you not stopping before the limit line either. Chances are, though, he will change his story at TDN, so this is no good unless you actually did make a complete stop and are ready to testify to that.
Re: Failure to Stop Ticket, VC 22450(A)
Update:
I was found guilty twice, 1st byTBWD then by Trial De Novo. I guess I wasn't able to explain the intersection well enough to the court. I was granted traffic school so I say it was definitely worth fighting. Thanks for all the help! Nice meeting you @Jim Kozlovich.