Speeding Ticket in California

Its simple... he plans on winning by assuming that you won't contest the ticket. The vast majority of tickets written do NOT get contested in court. If more tickets were contested, there would be less tickets written.

The more I look at this ticket, the dumber it seems to get. Not only did the officer write the wrong code, 22348 b, now I notice his location at the time he zapped me, or is that where he ticketed me? Anyway, there is no spot or on ramp going the direction I was. He asked me more than once, "Didn't you see me on the on ramp, when you passed me doing 101?"There isn't any 'on ramp' going that direction. I googled it in 3d, no on ramp.
Then they're saying it's a mandatory court appearance, even though it's
simply an arraignment. Won't give me price tag either. The discovery has not come yet.

Don't hold your breath until discovery comes. It likely won't. CA prosecutors simply ignore discovery requests routinely... as they ignore your rights. They do this because they know that traffic judges routinely ignore the law. You need to prepare your defense and prepare yourself for the possibility of an appeal afterwards.

From what you say, will the judge listen to any arguement I present? Why even bother preparing a case, if the facts never penetrate the feathers?
So, if , at any time, I'm driving, and some "not so detail conscious cop", can just write up a storm, and I'll just pay?
Yeah, just feeling a little bit sorry for myself.

Well, your arguments can come from different perspectives.

1. Technical merrit - this is where you can show the radar/lidar's calibration allows for at least a 1mph tollerance which would create a reasonable doubt. And, you can introduce Maestro's point about slip error. This too can produce reasonable doubt of 1mph.

2. Points of law - you can dispute the legality of documents presented. For example, if his documents presented (i.e. the calibration/maintenance records for his unit) are not certified true copies, then they are not admissable as evidence. Without evidence, the prosecution cannot establish a prima facie case.

3. Dispute the officer's testimony - While possible, this is the toughest row to hoe. The officer will say you were driving 101, you will say you were not. The tendency will be to believe the officer. However, you can start your cross examination by asking him if you were weaving in and out of traffic. If not, then ask him what the traffic was like (he likely has this documented on the back of his copy of the ticket - you can ask to see it). Then you can ask what the speed of the normal flow of traffic was. I'm sure he will say around 70. At that time, you can make your point that there is no way you could have been driving 31mph faster than moderate to heavy traffic without weaving. You CANNOT simply make it a "he said, she said". You have to provide something that tilts the credibility scale your way.

The bottom line is... you can't allow yourself to get sucked into the issue that you may or may not have been driving way over the limit. You MUST stay focused on the fact that the only thing you must accomplish in court is show reasonable doubt that you were not going 101. Even if the court is convinced that you were doing 100, then you are not guilty as charged. You can make the point that had the officer charged you with 22349, your arguments and plea may have been different, but you are in court to answer the charge of violating 22348.

What year is your vette? The reason I ask is that newer vehicles have a "black box" that data can be downloaded from. This data may include top speeds, etc. You say you've never had the car at that speed, this may be able to prove it. This data has been used in prosecutions before.

Quote:

---

Quoting bobj123

---

What year is your vette? The reason I ask is that newer vehicles have a "black box" that data can be downloaded from. This data may include top speeds, etc. You say you've never had the car at that speed, this may be able to prove it. This data has been used in prosecutions before.

---

Wow... that is a really good idea!!

I have an 85 vette, it's been totally re-constituted, I know of the computers, but never heard of a black box, would've come accross during the re-build.
Since I'm posting, what do you think about my going to court for arraignment earlier than the due date?If the prosecutor wants to up the charge, this would give me a one up on him, no?

I don't believe the prosecutor/cop can change the charge after arraingment. Personally, I'd rather defend a 22348 at 101mph than a 22349. A quick arraignment might be prudent.

Just completed a round trip to court for nothing. They only hold court for two days a month, this was not one.They only have one judge, one room, and probably one cop. The clerk I spoke to neglected to mention this, but at least I didn't land another tic today. I go back this Fri. 8:15 am, that's arraignment, then to trial in the afternoon. I hope that's rushing the prosecutor, it's rushing me, but I'm hoping this works to my advantage.
By the way- the police are as thick as I've everseen, no exaggeration, they are everwhere, the freeways are a mess, no one is speeding!
You see them coming at you across the merdian, going the opposite way, and they all seem to be holding a "gun", radar or lidar whatever- This was freeway driving, mostly I 80, and I 5.