Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 19
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    11

    Default Following Too Closely, Officer Admits to No Measurement of Distance, then Freaks Out

    My question involves a traffic ticket from the state of: UT

    I got a ticket for violating Utah Code Annotated 41-6a-711 which states:

    41-6a-711. Following another vehicle -- Safe distance -- Exceptions.
    (1) The operator of a vehicle:
    (a) may not follow another vehicle more closely than is reasonable and prudent, having regard for the:
    (i) speed of the vehicles;
    (ii) traffic upon the highway; and
    (iii) condition of the highway; and
    (b) shall follow at a distance so that at least two seconds elapse before reaching the location of the vehicle directly in front of the operator's vehicle.
    (2) Subsection (1)(b) does not apply to funeral processions or to congested traffic conditions resulting in prevailing vehicle speeds of less than 35 miles per hour.

    This occurred at 10:30 at night and my left headlight was out. The officer was passing me going the opposite direction and I was the last car in a line of 4-5, with the one directly in front of me being a van or SUV pulling a boat.

    I do not believe that I was following too closely. When I realized that the officer was going to give me a ticket I decided to ask him right there how he determined that I was less than 2 seconds behind. He stated "I didn't measure, I could just tell." He also made statements such as "I could tell by the distance of your headlight, err the lack of your headlight that you were too close"

    I repeatedly got him to admit that he did not scientifically measure my distance in any way as we passed each other at 120 mph combined speed.

    When I specifically said "You said you didn't scientifically measure me, you are admitting that right?" He raised his voice and said "I am not admitting anything." Then he proceeded to scream at me multiple times to shut up and completely came unglued. He told me that "The next car that comes by here and hits me, I am going to sue you"

    I was being direct but not a jerk and I was using words such as sir multiple times. Before he lost it on me, I told him that I would sign the ticket but that I was just trying to understand how he determined that I was too close.

    The kicker is that I have it all recorded on my phone, so I definitely have evidence that he stated that he did not measure my distance in any way.

    My question is, what is the best way to get this dismissed in court? I have a little less than a month before the trial. What should I ask for in discovery? Does anyone know of a form letter I can use for a basic discovery request? Any help is greatly appreciated.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    38,867

    Default Re: Following Too Closely, Officer Admits to No Measurement of Distance, then Freaks

    the law does not require he use any "scientific" means. All he has to do is look and if, in his judgment, you are following to closely, you get a ticket. If you believe you weren't following too closely, you are welcome to argue it in court. While section (b) specifically states following a distance traveled in less than 2 seconds is not adequate, section (a) is a judgment call. Obviously in the judgment of the officer, you were following too closely.

    btw: it's not that you used the word "sir" so many times as how you said it.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    11

    Default Re: Following Too Closely, Officer Admits to No Measurement of Distance, then Freaks

    Quote Quoting jk
    View Post
    the law does not require he use any "scientific" means. All he has to do is look and if, in his judgment, you are following to closely, you get a ticket. If you believe you weren't following too closely, you are welcome to argue it in court. While section (b) specifically states following a distance traveled in less than 2 seconds is not adequate, section (a) is a judgment call. Obviously in the judgment of the officer, you were following too closely.

    btw: it's not that you used the word "sir" so many times as how you said it.
    Well jk let me ask you, how does one determine that I was less than 2 seconds behind if he doesn't take a stop watch reading between two points? Can you honestly tell me that you can tell me the difference between a car that is 1.9 seconds behind and one that is 2.1 when you are passing at a combined speed of 120 miles in the dark? Oh and how does one see the lack of anything. That's like proving the non existence of something that doesn't exist. It's really simple, if he didn't "measure" me, like he admitted, then he has no "proof beyond a reasonable doubt". It was a crap ticket which are why my questions tripped him up and he freaked out in me.

    My comment about saying sir was to point out that I was not being a disrespectful prick to him that would warrant him treating me like that. Simple fact of the matter is that the same principle applies in that a visual estimation of speed won't "read: shouldn't considering case law) hold up in court. The officer has no way of determining when exactly 2 seconds has elapsed unless he uses a scientific device to measure the time.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    38,867

    Default Re: Following Too Closely, Officer Admits to No Measurement of Distance, then Freaks

    the actual time is irrelevant if applying section (a). You could be a 1/4 mile behind but if the road conditions were such that even that was an unsafe distance, the ticket is proper.
    basically, what that law requires is:

    following a distance no less than the 2 second space or greater if it requires to be at a safe distance from the vehicle in front of you.

    If the officer can make a valid argument that you simply were too close to be considered reasonable and prudent considering the situation at hand, he wins.

    I'm not saying he will win. I am simply saying the 2 seconds is not the issue. It is whether the cop can articulate an acceptable argument that the distance observed was not reasonable nor prudent. If you can overcome that argument AND that you were at least 2 seconds behind the other car (which could be argued away as you contend) you should prevail.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    California
    Posts
    20,594

    Default Re: Following Too Closely, Officer Admits to No Measurement of Distance, then Freaks

    The officer poorly articulated the circumstances, but it really does not take much to estimate whether or not you were less than two seconds behind a person. You estimate the speed and the gap between the two vehicles, determine fps (feet per second) and then determine whether or not it was too close. The officer could do this and in conjunction with the road conditions to support his opinion in the (a) section. For instance, using this 2 second rule if you were doing about 70 MPH then you should have had more than 176 feet between you and the car in front of you ... dollars to donuts you were NOT that far back. So, you had better hope that the officer does not get more articulate by the time he gets to court or you'll lose.

    As for his attitude and demeanor, you can always complain to his employing agency.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    616

    Default Re: Following Too Closely, Officer Admits to No Measurement of Distance, then Freaks

    Quote Quoting emtutusa
    View Post
    M

    The kicker is that I have it all recorded on my phone, so I definitely have evidence that he stated that he did not measure my distance in any way.
    d.
    Is it legal to record a conversation in Utah like that?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    38,867

    Default Re: Following Too Closely, Officer Admits to No Measurement of Distance, then Freaks

    Quote Quoting adam_
    View Post
    Is it legal to record a conversation in Utah like that?
    Under the statute, consent is not required for the taping of a non-electronic communication uttered by a person who does not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in that communication. See definition of “oral communication,” Utah Code Ann. § 77-23a-3.
    It would appear so.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    CT & IL
    Posts
    5,273

    Default Re: Following Too Closely, Officer Admits to No Measurement of Distance, then Freaks

    seems to me that <2 sec is a measureable quantity ... would require an accurate measurement. And it does not matter how you treat the cops...as long as you do not threaten them. If cops get puffy with me, I return the attitude. I would check wiretapping laws in respect to the use of any audio recording in the state though. The cops statement of following too close is a legal conclusion, not admissible at trial -- a simple objection would get this statement stricken. A judgment call must be based on facts, not conclusions. Of course, the cop may testify that he measured the OP's car time interval to the next vehicle; thats when on cross I would introduce the audio evidence (if allowed) ... then motion for acquittal after the state rests.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    123

    Default Re: Following Too Closely, Officer Admits to No Measurement of Distance, then Freaks

    HI is a one party state also and they tried to bring me up on charges of "eavesdropping", it didnt fly in court but they tried anyway.

    it does discuss about being a party of the conversation but the statutes are somewhat vauge on how this applies to civilian vs leo??

    http://le.utah.gov/~code/TITLE77/htm/77_23a000400.htm

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    38,867

    Default Re: Following Too Closely, Officer Admits to No Measurement of Distance, then Freaks

    Quote Quoting TheJKH1999
    View Post
    HI is a one party state also and they tried to bring me up on charges of "eavesdropping", it didnt fly in court but they tried anyway.

    it does discuss about being a party of the conversation but the statutes are somewhat vauge on how this applies to civilian vs leo??

    http://le.utah.gov/~code/TITLE77/htm/77_23a000400.htm
    vague?

    (b) A person not acting under color of law may intercept a wire, electronic, or oral communication if that person is a party to the communication or one of the parties to the communication has given prior consent to the interception, unless the communication is intercepted for the purpose of committing any criminal or tortious act in violation of state or federal laws.
    looks pretty clear to me. Single party permission is all that is needed.

    I see no exception for one of the parties being a LEO

    1. Sponsored Links
       

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Speeding Tickets: Did Not Record the Distance the Speed Measurement Took Place
    By Haveacase in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 07-21-2011, 09:08 AM
  2. DNA Test After 10 Years when Mother Admits Having Slept Around
    By dkburke4 in forum Child Custody, Support and Visitation
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-18-2011, 06:53 PM
  3. Following Too Closely: Assured Clear Distance Ahead (Following Too Closely)
    By vespo09 in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 07-22-2010, 11:29 AM
  4. Speeding Tickets: If a Cop Lied on the Ticket and Admits It in Court Can I Use It Against Him
    By kpingry84 in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 09-09-2009, 03:43 PM
  5. Off duty cop freaks out
    By jessicazi in forum Police Investigations
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 12-30-2006, 02:08 PM
 
 
Sponsored Links

Legal Help, Information and Resources