I'm going to guess that you've got about an 80% chance of a dismissal, but I can't be sure until you tell us what type of RADAR was used (why you would redact that information is beyond me). Meanwhile, I'll address your specific points:

Quote Quoting samcrash
View Post
On the Ticket:
1) IRLJ rule 2.1 (b)(3), was not followed in regards to providing information to the defendant in regards to the vehicle style. He omitted style, and color.
However, 3.1 (d) seems to indicate the above rule might not make that much of a difference.
You're right -- it's not relevant.

Quote Quoting samcrash
View Post
2) There is no cross street mentioned.. only MP BLOCK 800. I had just left a house less than half a mile away from where I was pulled over. I originally thought he was stopped and pulled out behind me... but if he was going the opposite way, that potentially means that distance is even shorter??
Oh, "800 block of E. Grover Street" is PLENTY good enough. Remember, both of you were moving.

Quote Quoting samcrash
View Post
On the Officer Report:
1) Officer did not indicate unit was tested nor the results of the test, only that the unit was calibrated int and ext before and after the stop.
2) Officer does not indicate what type of calibration was used: Tuning fork vs button calibration.
3) Officer does not indicate who performed the calibration.
These are GOOD points, but you haven't even gone far enough. Let us know the RADAR make and model, and we'll be able to expand on these points.

Quote Quoting samcrash
View Post
4) Officer does not indicate training or certification in calibrating or use of the radar.
Not all that good of a point. Most judges I've seen ASSUME that officers have been sufficiently trained (which is probably a reasonable assumption).

Quote Quoting samcrash
View Post
5) Issue with Officer's Testimony: I did not indicate awareness as to why I was pulled over by the officer, nor was the question posed.
He said, "I clocked you going 39"
I said, "Oh!", which is a far cry from admission of guilt or awareness
I explained I was late and wasn't paying attention to my speed. However, I didn't confirm or deny that I was speeding. His report seems to indicate that I admitted to intentionally speeding. When I saw the officer behind me, I checked my speed and it was under 35. My wife was in the car with me, so she can confirm this.
Not relevant.

Quote Quoting samcrash
View Post
6) There was another vehicle in front of me when I was pulled over.
Not relevant.

Quote Quoting samcrash
View Post
7) Again, no cross street mentioned.. only MP BLOCK.
Again, "800 block" is sufficient.

Quote Quoting samcrash
View Post
Other possibilities:

Was the area a speed trap? I'm still working on this one. If the Engineering and Traffic Survey is older than 5 yrs, I may be able to contest that it is a local street or road on the point that there is more than half a mile between stop signs / traffic lights on the particular stretch I was on. Everything else about this is stacked against me though. I think the area would be classified as residential (although it has mixed business).
25 MPH is the STATUTORY speed limit for streets in a city or town. No survey is required. Besides, we're NOT in CA.

Quote Quoting samcrash
View Post
Can I argue the safety of my speed? Possibly. Not a school zone, perfect weather conditions, not much traffic at all (everyone at work and kids at school). I was not tailgating the car ahead of me. If anything, I was matching their speed. There is a retirement home just ahead of where I was pulled over though.
You can argue the "facts" of the case all you want -- but, keep in mind that I have NEVER seen ANYONE win by arguing the "facts". At least, not for a speeding ticket.

As I said, let us know the make and model of the SMD. Then we can go into some detail about your defense.

Barry