Really nice to have knowledgeable answers. Thank you for this.
Let me see if I understand now:
Since I was cited for 22349, the provisions in VC 40802 (surveys, radar certification) don't apply at all.
Since I was cited for 22349, the provisions in VC 40803 don't apply, and a prosecutor is not required to be present or follow the following code -- even though radar was used:
"In any prosecution under this code of a charge involving the speed of a vehicle, where enforcement involves the use of radar or other electronic devices which measure the speed of moving objects, the prosecution shall establish, as part of its prima facie case, that the evidence or testimony presented is not based upon a speed trap as defined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 40802. "
22349 is binary. It really doesn't matter what the officer wrote on the citation for the approximate vehicle speed. If there is any evidence the speed was over 55, the conviction is upheld. Or said another way, the technicality that the officer inaccurately wrote speed of 70+ has no bearing on this case. Providing evidence that he measured/estimated an incorrect number is immaterial.
Even the radar use doesn't matter if the officer testifies that the visual estimate of speed was any substantial amount over 55.
Thus, the officer needn't recall from independent recollection and bringing into question his memory of the incident, (typical questions of 'did my truck have a white camper shell? What was I wearing? ) or questions of proper radar use (Was audio Doppler off or on? do you believe your unit can give a false reading? .. etc) don't matter and will only piss off the judge.
I think it's time to swallow bitter and take my losses.