I would first ask them to verify that they have the authority to write speeding 'citations' to the general public...and what are the legal consequences if you ignored it?
Only residents agreed in writing to abide by the HOA rules(CC&R's).
Printable View
I would first ask them to verify that they have the authority to write speeding 'citations' to the general public...and what are the legal consequences if you ignored it?
Only residents agreed in writing to abide by the HOA rules(CC&R's).
Since any such appeal would be to an HOA board or someone else likely lacking in any legal training, there would be no real need for the security officer to set a legal foundation for diddly. Personally, I wouldn't waste time contesting such a thing unless I actually resided within the HOA's authority. And, having once lived in such a community, I would never do so again.
If the OP is truly interested in contesting this, by all means, they should contact whatever number or address is on the notice they received and look into it. However, if they are not subject to the CCRs there would be no real way for the HOA to enforce any speed violation.
The only thing they can do is not let you in the next time. This only if they keep track of license plates and "violations", which is unlikely.
I'll also add to this, if the security guard were to hold you for local law enforcement to arrive, the police officer can write you a ticket (most likely careless driving) and the security guard would sign it as the complainant. But then the security guard would have to take a day off from work, to show to court if you were to contest the ticket.
Largely correct. A detention in CA can be made if the detaining party intends to make a private person's arrest (PC 837) for the offense and turn them over to law enforcement.
However, a violation of state law (presumably VC 22350) would still have to apply. No probable cause to believe a violation of state law occurred, no crime to have been detained for. If this area is private property and there is no ordinance that allows the enforcement of the CVC on the property, then no CVC cite could be issued. Even then, if the "highway" was not "publicly maintained", most the CVC would not apply. If this is a gated community with roads maintained by private funds, then it might have to be some local muni code.
I doubt a CVC cite could be issued even it was a pubic road.
Citizens cannot witness what they think is speeding, do a citizen's arrest on the perp, then call the police to write a citation. It just doesn't work that way. The cop has to witness or have better evidence of the infraction to write it.
It can be difficult to prove, but it can and has been done (and can be annoying as hell since it tends to require a report). And statements are evidence. That is, the private person can try and articulate why they think the speed was either unsafe or in excess of the posted limit and that would be sufficient at least for the citation. Pursuant to PC 837, a private party CAN make an arrest for any "public offense" committed or attempted in their presence, and a traffic infraction is a "public offense". It might be up to the officer to decide if there is probable cause to actually issue the citation, or a court to determine if there is proof beyond a reasonable doubt, but a private person can sign a citizen's arrest even for infractions.
Keep in mind that the officer cannot weigh the validity of the offense in their decision, they can only act on their observations and statements. If the private person insists on the C/A the officer has three options: (1) Arrest and release on a citation for the infraction or misdemeanor (no cite option for a felony), (2) arrest and book into jail, or, (3) take no action based upon a lack of probable cause (a possible release pursuant to PC 849, depending on the circumstances). The officer cannot evaluate the offense and choose to act or not to act based upon his personal opinion of the offense; and, it can be a crime (per PC 142 - a potential felony) to refuse to accept such an arrest provided there exists even minimal probable cause.
I have had to take such arrests a handful of times in my career - twice where they were on me, and a few other times where I was either an assisting officer or the supervisor. They suck, but, we have little choice.
This sounds very strange to me. Are you saying that a private citizen can witness a car speeding, pull that car over, get the driver out of the car and put him under citizen's arrest? Then, if the driver refuses to go along with it, for him to be put into restraints or a headlock by the concerned citizen until the cops come? All for doing 42 in a 35mph zone.
Talk about exposing yourself to a lawsuit for assault and false imprisonment. But you are saying it has been done without a hitch?
Never said they could pull a vehicle over, though the law does theoretically permit it ... provided the allegedly speeding vehicle wants to submit to the other party's authority. A motorist is under no legal obligation to yield to another motorist. Further, even a private person is permitted to use "reasonable" force to affect the arrest. There is ample case law to support a private person's use of "reasonable force" to affect the citizen's arrest. I suppose using a headlock or other force to detain someone for an infraction might be considered UNreasonable ... but, if he was trying to flee ??? Yes, the use of force is possible and legal, provided it is reasonable.
The most common scenario is that the offending vehicle is followed to a location and the driver is contacted (and possibly detained) at that location and the police are called. Once the police arrive, that's when they have to sort the whole thing out and resolve it on one of the aforementioned three ways: Cite, custody, or release for lack of cause.
Keep in mind that I speak of CA law, not the law in other states. I cannot say with any certainty whether force can be used elsewhere, or what limits might exist to a private person's ability to affect an arrest or detention in other states.