Approximation of 63 MPH vs. Radar of 43 MPH
My question involves a speeding ticket from the State of: California.
I received a 22350VC Unsafe Speed ticket in San Diego. The posted limit was 35mph. The officer clocked me on the radar gun at 43mph, but "approximated" my speed at 63mph on the ticket. I feel that the radar gun was more accurate than his approximation, but did not notice this distinction until after I had driven away.
Additionally, the officer did not check the box that reads something like "Under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of California, I believe this estimate to be correct and true." He did scrawl his name, ID#, beat, etc, but never put a check in that box. Is this significant in court if I challenge the ticket?
I received a $500+ fine today with no traffic school option, and feel that this penalty is unjust. I do not believe I was doing 63mph in a 35 zone. Although speeding 43mph in a 35 zone is still speeding, I believe my penalty does not fit my crime.
I want to challenge this in court, to the effect of reducing my fine and putting traffic school back on the table. How should I go about this? Can I go about this?
Re: Approx. 63 vs. Radar 43. What
Were you ticketed for 43 in a 35, or for 63 in a 35? If it's the former, the officer's note is a reminder to himself and the prosecutor that you were going much faster before he locked his radar on you, but doesn't increase the ticket from what the radar said.
You've been to court on this, so did you raise this issue in court? If not, why not? If so, what did the judge say?
Re: Approx. 63 vs. Radar 43. What
Quote:
Quoting
Mr. Knowitall
Were you ticketed for 43 in a 35, or for 63 in a 35? If it's the former, the officer's note is a reminder to himself and the prosecutor that you were going much faster before he locked his radar on you, but doesn't increase the ticket from what the radar said.
You've been to court on this, so did you raise this issue in court? If not, why not? If so, what did the judge say?
First, the posted sign indicated a 35 zone. The approximated speed was 63, but the radar was clocked at 43.
Second, I have not been to court on this. I only today received notice of my impending fine and court date in the mail.
Third, I haven't had a speeding infraction for over one year, and I have not attended traffic school in over a year and a half. I am aware that going 25+ miles/per hour over the speed limit negates the traffic school option, but the officer clocked me only going 8 miles/per hour over the limit. Shouldn't this mean that I should get a substantially lower fine (not exceeding $100) and the traffic school option? :confused:
Fourth, I believe that when clocking me on the radar, the officer could have made a mistake. The area from which he was parked (on a private street, parallel to the main road, but separated by foliage and a solid line of parked cars) was obstructed from clear view. Additionally, there were cars around me, between the officer and me. I drive a dark sedan, and the ticket was issued at night. I just see so many instances in which he got the wrong guy. :wallbang:
What should I do?
Re: Approximation of 63 MPH vs. Radar of 43 MPH
Are you saying that he put 43 AND 63 on the ticket???
That is just wierd... Are you sure it isn't just bad handwriting?? Which one is honestly closer to being accurate?
Re: Approximation of 63 MPH vs. Radar of 43 MPH
Honestly, the 43mph is the closer figure.
And I'm 100% sure the approximated speed is at 63mph.
When they assessed the fine to me, they must have used the 63mph approximation because how else could they reasonably charge me $527? With the 63mph approximation, I'd be 28mph over the speed limit, but with the radar figure of 43mph, I'm only 8mph over the speed limit.
How can I challenge this in court?
Re: Approximation of 63 MPH vs. Radar of 43 MPH
you plead "not guilty".
then when you get to court, you ask the officer why he would list your speed as "approximated at 63" when the radar provided a reading of 43.
Re: Approximation of 63 MPH vs. Radar of 43 MPH
But if the radar clocked me at 43mph and I plead "not guilty," I'll still lose because even if they ignore the 63mph approximation, I'm conceding guilt to doing 43mph in a 35mph zone.
Can someone specifically answer my question as to how to reduce my absurdly high fine and put traffic school back on the table?
Re: Approximation of 63 MPH vs. Radar of 43 MPH
Quote:
=threepart;276064]But if the radar clocked me at 43mph and I plead "not guilty," I'll still lose because even if they ignore the 63mph approximation, I'm conceding guilt to doing 43mph in a 35mph zone.
How is that conceding guilt.? That is contesting the fact you were driving 63mph. That does not mean you are admitting you were driving 43. The intent is to disprove the 63.
Re: Approximation of 63 MPH vs. Radar of 43 MPH
If your ticket really has both speeds on there, you should just go to court for arraignment and ask for dismissal based on the ticket being defective on its face. There is no clear charge. If it fails, then you should plead not guilty and begin preparing for trial.
Re: Approximation of 63 MPH vs. Radar of 43 MPH
Quote:
Quoting
EWYLTJ
If your ticket really has both speeds on there, you should just go to court for arraignment and ask for dismissal based on the ticket being defective on its face. There is no clear charge. If it fails, then you should plead not guilty and begin preparing for trial.
This sounds reasonable, but how do I go about asking for dismissal? I'm sure there's an established legal format for contesting the charge based on dismissal of evidence (namely, the ticket/officer's testimony based on contradictory radar proof).
If I plead not guilty, assuming the judge will not dismiss the case based on the contradictory ticket, what defense do I have?
-I checked the area out and took pictures, and the 35mph sign isn't all that obvious, but it's obvious enough to preclude a speed trap defense (obstructed speed limit sign).
-Also, I found where the officer must've parked his car to catch me. It's a busy street and it was at night, and there were a few parked cars, trees, and a full lane of traffic between him and me. But the location isn't bad enough to warrant a convincing radar defense, saying that the trees, or parked cars obstructed the reading.
-If I contest that there were cars in the #2 lane between me (in the #1 lane) and the officer, as to where he couldn't have possibly read my speed with the radar gun, that still doesn't explain how he "approximated" my speed. Couldn't he just say he paced my speed on the speedometer (even though he couldn't have accurately estimated 63mph because I know for a fact I was driving well under that) and it would be a battle of words between he and I?
Would I do best contacting a lawyer to help me sort this out? It seems really complicated now that I've got a possibly flawed ticket that could vindicate me..