Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    4

    Default Red Light Violation Due to Sensor Not Registering My Motorcycle. CVC 21453(C)

    My question involves a traffic ticket from the state of: California, Los Angeles County

    I received a citation for violating CVC 21453(c), I pleaded not guilty and requested a trial by written declaration which I lost. Now I have a trial de novo and would like to find out how to reason best to get the ticket dismissed.
    Here is what I wrote in defense for my written declaration:

    The facts of my case are as follows: I was riding my motorcycle northbound on Pacific Coast Highway at 0105PM on 5-10-11, with the intention of making a legal u-turn when possible. I came to a full stop at the left turn/u-turn signal (see submitted photograph) and sat there waiting for a green light. After several light changes (each light change is about 2 min - longer if no one turns left in the south bound traffic) for all the other lanes at the intersection - north bound lane, south bound lane, south bound left turn lane all signals cycled through red and green except my light, it stayed red. I assumed that either the light was defective or did not sense my motorcycle - this I have occasionally experienced when riding a bicycle or motorcycle. So I proceeded as reasonable and prudent with my turn when the on coming/southbound traffic had a red light and mine was supposed to be green. This is when I received the citation. The ticket issuing officer was going northbound on PCH. I explained my situation to the officer and his comment was to wait until the light changes. On subsequent visits to the same light I have experienced wait times of more than 15 minutes until the light eventually changes and this only when a car entered left turn/u-turn lane in the intersection.

    I appreciate any help.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    OH10
    Posts
    17,019

    Default Re: Best Defense for CVC 21453 (C) Violation Due to Sensor Not Registering My Motorcy

    The appropriate response would have been to reposition the bike on the sensor pad, until it triggered the sensor.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Snohomish, WA
    Posts
    1,588

    Default Re: Best Defense for CVC 21453 (C) Violation Due to Sensor Not Registering My Motorcy

    I listened to a guy explain the same exact story to a judge in the West Covina court back in the late 80's. The guy said "What am I supposed to do, just sit there and wait forever?" The judge said "Yes. Guilty."

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    CT & IL
    Posts
    5,273

    Default Re: Best Defense for CVC 21453 (C) Violation Due to Sensor Not Registering My Motorcy

    Telling your story to the officer? Not a good idea .. you just admitted guilt. You only hope is a) that the signal is not posted properly b) that the signal was not placed there properly and c) a judge who is a relative (not kidding-I had an uncle who was a traffic court judge --- he never found me guilty lol)

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    LA LA Land
    Posts
    9,170

    Default Re: Red Light Violation Due to Sensor Not Registering My Motorcycle. CVC 21453(C)

    ^^^ LOL

    The question I would have is at what point in time during that "waiting period" does it become legal or even permissible to disobey a traffic signal?


    Quote Quoting me029
    View Post
    I assumed that either the light was defective or did not sense my motorcycle - this I have occasionally experienced when riding a bicycle or motorcycle.
    Actually, we've all experienced it at one point in time or another... Question is, did you make ANY effort to contact Caltrans (I assume PCH/Hwy 1 would be under their jurisdiction) to inquire about a malfunction and if none, to notify them of a possible bad sensor? I mean it sounds like you frequent this particular intersection often enough, that it might help you and others to be a bit more proactive!


    Quote Quoting me029
    View Post
    So I proceeded as reasonable and prudent with my turn when the on coming/southbound traffic had a red light and mine was supposed to be green.
    So in essence, you admitted to knowingly and wantonly committing the violation... Basically what I would call a "guilty with an explanation plea" that should have been offered at the arraignment in hopes for some sympathy from the judge and a possible fine reduction (in spite of the fact that 21453(c) carries a statutory minimum fine of $100, I have seen it reduced by a few judges), and yet you were expecting a outright dismissal? After a TBD?? All while you flat out admit to blowing the light???

    Also, if I can touch on the underlined bit. With as little as I know about traffic signals, it is my understanding that with a "fully/semi actuated signal" (as the one you describe), if your light remained red, then regardless which cycle the signal was in, either:
    (1) "Cross traffic (east <--> west)" had the green... or,
    (2) "Southbound straight through traffic" -along with the "south --> East left turn traffic" (if northbound straight through traffic was red) had the green... or,
    (3) "Southbound straight through traffic" along with "northbound straight through traffic" had the green...

    That means that if you can be certain that "southbound traffic had a red light and yours was supposed to be green but wasn't (meaning it was red) --->>> East West traffic Had the Green!"
    Meaning you never really had an opportunity to SAFELY enter the intersection with any reasonable possibility that you had the right of way only if your light was green. Why? Simply because the timing circuit would not have left your signal at red while other conflicting cycles were at red as well.


    Quote Quoting me029
    View Post
    On subsequent visits to the same light I have experienced wait times of more than 15 minutes until the light eventually changes and this only when a car entered left turn/u-turn lane in the intersection.
    Is that really the only opportunity for you to turn left for so many miles that you would return to the same signal knowing you're going to get stuck waiting... only to... uhm... get stuck waiting? Or do you simply look around, duck, turn and call it a day? Honestly!

    Quote Quoting me029
    View Post
    I appreciate any help.
    Sorry, but this is about as best as I can think of: For future reference, you should consider making a right turn (eastbound) at the same intersection, a u-turn a block or so down that side road (now westbound) and finally a either straight through if you had intended a left turn initially or a left turn if you had intended a u-turn! --> Just do not make a u-turn midblock if it is a residential or business district; both of those are illegal <--

    As for the citation you're fighting, your only hope is for the officer not to appear at the TDN! If he's there, your goose is cooked!

    OK... Maybe one more tip:



  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    4

    Default Re: Red Light Violation Due to Sensor Not Registering My Motorcycle. CVC 21453(C)

    Hi "ThatGuy",

    First a thank you for explaining this situation so thoroughly. I now understand my situation much better than at any point before.


    Actually, we've all experienced it at one point in time or another... Question is, did you make ANY effort to contact Caltrans (I assume PCH/Hwy 1 would be under their jurisdiction) to inquire about a malfunction and if none, to notify them of a possible bad sensor? I mean it sounds like you frequent this particular intersection often enough, that it might help you and others to be a bit more proactive!
    I've tried what you suggested without much success, no return phone calls. Here is a bit of information I found while researching this issue:

    CALIFORNIA GOVERNOR VETOES RED LIGHT BILL California Assembly Bill 2521, introduced by Assembly Member Jay LaSuer (R- County of San Diego), would have required all new and replacement traffic-actuated signal devices to recognize motorcycles and bicycles, as well as new lighter cars, but was vetoed by Governor Gray Davis. The bill passed through the legislature without opposition in both the Senate and the Assembly, but was doomed to defeat when it reached the governor's desk on September 18.
    From the Desk of Governor Gray Davis...
    SEP 18, 2002 To Members of the California State Assembly: I am returning Assembly Bill 2521 without my signature. This bill would require that any traffic signal that is installed or replaced be equipped with detectors that are capable of detecting bicycles and motorcycles as well as other motor vehicles. While I recognize the merits of this measure, I am vetoing this bill because it would result in unknown reimbursable state-mandated costs on local government by requiring them to install these new detectors. I would also note that local governments and the Department of Transportation are already free to use the detectors required in this bill. Sincerely, GRAY DAVIS

    To the point of being familiar with this part of town, I am not. The reason I came back was to double check on how this light works, this is when I found out only a car will trigger the sensor.

    This "intersection" is not a standard type of intersection, see attached photos.

    I couldn't figure out how to attach photos to this message?


    This is where I wanted to make my legal u-turn, I had pulled out of a parking lot (northbound/east side of PCH) about 1/2 mile down the street with a sign prohibiting a left turn to go southbound on PCH. So I went north until I found the place to make a legal u-turn. Now I am there for quiet a while until I realize the traffic light is not working with me sitting on my motorcycle. There is no eastbound or westbound traffic, only a crosswalk and an entrance to an apartment complex. So whenever the south bound traffic stops it's quiet easy to check the "intersection" and make sure I can safely proceed with the u-turn. This is what I did. You have to go about 2 miles to get to a conventional intersection where you can make a right and than get back on PCH southbound. The officer was not friendly, when I started to explain to him what happened he just walked away.

    The total fine/bail is $479 plus additional insurance premium for 3 years, that's why I want to fight this as good as I can.

    Thanks again!

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    CT & IL
    Posts
    5,273

    Default Re: Red Light Violation Due to Sensor Not Registering My Motorcycle. CVC 21453(C)

    The only two arguments I can see as having any chance is (other than those i listed above which can be strong defenses):

    1) entrapment by estopple .... if you have been told by a gov't official that what you did is a proper procedure then you can argue that you relied on this for your situation & the state is estoppled from giving you a ticket using the procedure you were told to perform

    2) 14th amendment due process rights --- I don't think this is a strong or hopeful argument

    I can see this like a cop directing traffic at a stop light & him telling you to proceed through the red light & then giving you a ticket for following the cop's wave through.

    I do not see an entrapment defense for an engineering design issue like this but is also one to investigate. I do not see it as a viable defense at this time. Post back if you find any case law supporting this.

    Some states have passed laws making it OK to do what you just did .. so you may be able to bring this up at trial .. it will show that pressure of electrically controlled lights have been an issue.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    LA LA Land
    Posts
    9,170

    Default Re: Red Light Violation Due to Sensor Not Registering My Motorcycle. CVC 21453(C)

    Quote Quoting me029
    View Post
    First a thank you for explaining this situation so thoroughly. I now understand my situation much better than at any point before.
    Not a problem...


    Quote Quoting me029
    View Post
    I've tried what you suggested without much success, no return phone calls.
    Unfortunate, and highly unusual of Caltrans!

    It might mean that they are aware of the issue and have no current/near term plans to change it! I don't know...

    Had this been a situation where your case might benefit from some sort of response, I would have suggested moving up the chain of command, or possibly submitting a CPRA request for engineering surveys or design plans for that particular intersection... At the end of the day though, there is no evidence of either defect or malfunction. And any communication would be a futile attempt that might only add to your frustration.

    As a good example to frustrating, you posted the following:

    Quote Quoting me029
    View Post
    CALIFORNIA GOVERNOR VETOES RED LIGHT BILL California Assembly Bill 2521, introduced by Assembly Member Jay LaSuer (R- County of San Diego), would have required all new and replacement traffic-actuated signal devices to recognize motorcycles and bicycles, as well as new lighter cars, but was vetoed by Governor Gray Davis. The bill passed through the legislature without opposition in both the Senate and the Assembly, but was doomed to defeat when it reached the governor's desk on September 18.
    From the Desk of Governor Gray Davis...
    SEP 18, 2002 To Members of the California State Assembly: I am returning Assembly Bill 2521 without my signature. This bill would require that any traffic signal that is installed or replaced be equipped with detectors that are capable of detecting bicycles and motorcycles as well as other motor vehicles. While I recognize the merits of this measure, I am vetoing this bill because it would result in unknown reimbursable state-mandated costs on local government by requiring them to install these new detectors. I would also note that local governments and the Department of Transportation are already free to use the detectors required in this bill. Sincerely, GRAY DAVIS
    I'm not really sure how that would change much... A 10 year old decision by a Governor who is no longer there and one who, literally, got booted out of office... Incidentally, for the same thing he tried to avoid in vetoing that bill... “Dollars and cents!”

    Fact is and still remains, you ran a red light... And while most people do so unintentionally and carelessly, and still have to pay the fine. You did so intentionally (though it is your belief is that you were careful not to endanger yourself or anyone else)!


    Quote Quoting me029
    View Post
    To the point of being familiar with this part of town, I am not. The reason I came back was to double check on how this light works, this is when I found out only a car will trigger the sensor.
    And here is what that tells me: ^This fact, along with the lack of response from Caltrans (due, IMO to them possibly knowing about this issue at this intersection in particular or just as general knowledge), combined with that info & memo you found online, obviates the fact that this is not necessarily a malfunction; not saying it was intentionally designed that way, it simply happens to work out that way -not only for motorcycles and bicycles, by the way, but for some newer autos as well. And that, unfortunately, weakens your argument even more. But this is only my opinion; a judge may see it differently!


    Quote Quoting me029
    View Post
    This "intersection" is not a standard type of intersection, see attached photos.

    I couldn't figure out how to attach photos to this message?
    For GoogleMaps links, you just copy and past the link... For regular pictures, you'd have to upload those to a web hosting site like photobucket.com and then copy the link for each photo, click on the image icon in the menu above the dialog box, paste the link... That said, I did actually get the link you first posted in the original automatic email notification the forum sent out for your post, and though it does actually pinpoint a location on PCH, I wasn't able to fully picture what you were describing below:


    Quote Quoting me029
    View Post
    This is where I wanted to make my legal u-turn, I had pulled out of a parking lot (northbound/east side of PCH) about 1/2 mile down the street with a sign prohibiting a left turn to go southbound on PCH. So I went north until I found the place to make a legal u-turn. Now I am there for quiet a while until I realize the traffic light is not working with me sitting on my motorcycle. There is no eastbound or westbound traffic, only a crosswalk and an entrance to an apartment complex. So whenever the south bound traffic stops it's quiet easy to check the "intersection" and make sure I can safely proceed with the u-turn. This is what I did. You have to go about 2 miles to get to a conventional intersection where you can make a right and than get back on PCH southbound.
    My bad on assuming a normal intersection... I still don't see how the light showed a red indication for all traffic patterns which conflicted with yours and yet your light stayed red. I cannot think of one scenario where it would be needed. But that is not what you stated... You never said all red was on... Only that you thought it was safe when you turned!

    There may have been a flashing red out of the apartment complex but that still shows a steady red for your indication... But I since I cannot see the intersection, I am not going to guess how, why or what! Then again, I am not a traffic engineer!!!


    Quote Quoting me029
    View Post
    The officer was not friendly, when I started to explain to him what happened he just walked away.
    The officer is really not the final arbiter of the matter... His job, if he witnesses a violation (or an alleged violation), is to issue a citation and later appear in court and tell his story; you'll get an opportunity to tell yours (again) and it is up to the judge to decide. So most officers prefer not to engage in too much conversation while others might actively try and engage you in one simply looking for a statement or two that they may use to incriminate you. Not that it would have made much difference here. In this case, you are actually, at least thus far, admitting the violation only to follow up with an excuse that is, IMO, is pretty weak as far as being a mitigating factor, simply because you had other alternatives. Or at least, I assume you did.

    One of those alternatives would have been to exit the left turn lane, back into the left straightaway lane, and continue up PCH until a point where you can legally turn. Again, after looking at your map, and with being unsure as to your location at the time, I have no idea how long of a drive that would have been, still, it was an option. Keep in mind that there is a legal way to do that and an illegal way to do that. Entering the intersection (i.e. crossing the limit line) from the left turn lane would likely net you a citation in violation of a traffic control device. Even if that had happened, it would have been a lesser evil considering the fact that such a violation is punishable by a lower fine ($234 for a violation of 22101(d) versus $479 for a violation of 21453(c)). However, crossing the white solid dividing line from the left turn lane, into the straightaway lane and then entering the intersection from the straightaway lane, is perfectly legal.

    Quote Quoting me029
    View Post
    The total fine/bail is $479 plus additional insurance premium for 3 years, that's why I want to fight this as good as I can.
    If by fighting it you mean taking a shot that your citing officer won't appear at trial, then I can see that as a slim possibility and you'll find out soon enough. Other than that, the $479 is actually the base fine plus penalties and assessments, all of which are set by the legislature. It is actually a fixed statutory fine with typically no room for judicial discretion if/when it comes to reductions, although I've seen some judges who simply overlook that and are willing to do so but only if a guilty plea it taken at the arraignment. This way you save your self some time but from the court's perspective, its another case that is off calender.

    As for the 3 year insurance premium increase, well, there is a sure fire way to avoid that by paying the $50 or so traffic school administrative fee to the court plus $10-$15 for the traffic school course itself. The best time to make that election is at the arraignment, and though some judges do allow it after a TBD and you may in fact get that offer immediately prior to your TDN. And in rare instances, I've seen it offered after a TDN.

    It is up to you at this time to decide whether risking the violation point in hopes the officer will appear, versus opting out if you are offered the opportunity to take traffic school before the TDN. You maybe able to recognize the officer in court, and if he is there, I would abandon ship in a minute... The way I see it, the likelihood of a judge dismissing the entire thing based on the excuse you're offering is EXTREMELY slim! I wish I could have helped in a different way! I am calling it as I see it...

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    CT & IL
    Posts
    5,273

    Default Re: Red Light Violation Due to Sensor Not Registering My Motorcycle. CVC 21453(C)

    Quote Quoting That Guy
    View Post
    I would abandon ship in a minute... The way I see it, the likelihood of a judge dismissing the entire thing based on the excuse you're offering is EXTREMELY slim! I wish I could have helped in a different way! I am calling it as I see it...
    I think everyone sees the injustice served by this ticket, issued by a cop who does not see his role in the enforcement of laws. The cop should not be a cop in my opinion.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    4

    Default Re: Red Light Violation Due to Sensor Not Registering My Motorcycle. CVC 21453(C)

    Quick update:

    Had my trial today and elected to go for the traffic school option offered before the hearing. I still feel I had a pretty good case but all the research indicates a pretty slim chance of winning.

    Thanks again foe all the help.

    1. Sponsored Links
       

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Lights, Signs and Traffic Controls: Right Turn on Red Light, CVC 21453(A)
    By RnStudent909 in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 12-23-2011, 12:21 AM
  2. Lights, Signs and Traffic Controls: Turning Right on a Red Light, VC 21453(A)
    By chelu1 in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-24-2011, 10:52 PM
  3. Speeding Tickets: Violation Red Light Code 21453 (A)
    By bublik in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 08-21-2010, 02:14 PM
  4. Lights, Signs and Traffic Controls: Red Light Violation, VC 21453(A), Falsely Accused, Under Appeal
    By sdnavyman in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 05-06-2010, 01:27 AM
  5. Lights, Signs and Traffic Controls: California 21453 (A) - Red Light Violation
    By jvicky0718 in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 04-17-2010, 12:52 AM
 
 
Sponsored Links

Legal Help, Information and Resources