Results 1 to 10 of 15

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    2

    Default Failing to Stop at the Limit Line vs. at the Stop Sign

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

    My previous thread regarding this ticket was: http://www.expertlaw.com/forums/showthread.php?t=174999

    After receiving advice from the forum and nolo press, I submitted my TBD as follows:

    "I plead Not Guilty to the charge of violating CVC 22450(a).

    The facts of my case are as follows: I came to a complete stop at a stop sign at the West-bound 134, Figueroa street off-ramp and proceeded to make a left turn, from the left lane, when it was safe. I was soon stopped by a CHP officer and charged with violating CVC 22450(a). Per the officer’s language on the citation itself, "22450(a) VC Stop at stop sign, limit line req.", he cites not a failure to stop, but failure to stop at the limit line. Unable to see the limit line, I stopped at the only clearly visible, reasonable stopping place, the stop sign itself, at the intersection’s entrance.

    Please see attached Figure 1, which shows the condition of the limit line, taken at night to show similar visible conditions (as much as possible with a flash, which I could not turn off). As my photo shows, the line is obscured, largely worn away and incomplete. In the absence of this marking, I believe that my complete stop at the stop sign itself constitutes a reasonable observance of CVC 22450, as "approaching a stop sign at the entrance to...an intersection" I did in fact still stop "before entering the crosswalk on the near side of the intersection."

    As supporting Figure 2 (image of intersection from Google Maps) shows, even from well behind the stop sign, there are (and were) clear sight lines to any traffic that could have been in the intersection. This means that on the night of the citation, from the stop sign itself, I could easily see all sides of the intersection and establish that there was no oncoming traffic. I believe that the stop sign itself can thus be reasonably considered the “entrance to the intersecting roadway” as per CVC 22450. I thereby met the legal definition of a safe stop: I came to a complete stop, did so prior to the intersection, and established that no other vehicles were in the intersection before proceeding safely.

    I thus argue, that I did not violate CVC 22450(a) and ask the court to find me “not guilty” of this violation and dismiss my citation."


    Please give me advice on how to approach the Trial de Novo. I felt that my description and photos should have been enough to warrant a Not Guilty decision, but apparently not according to the Los Angeles Court. Thank you in advance for your help.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    1,055

    Default Re: Failing to Stop at the Limit Line vs. at the Stop Sign

    You did make a pretty good case but without seeing the officer's statement, it's not possible to comment on the verdict. At the courthouse, you should be able to see the officer's statement. Ask to see your case file. The officer's statement would be admissible as impeachment if he testifies differently at TDN.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    23

    Default Re: Failing to Stop at the Limit Line vs. at the Stop Sign

    I have had 2 tickets dismissed in WA State regarding stop bar lines. Mine were free right hand turns captured by red light cameras. Both instances I came to a complete stop but my front tire rolled past the
    stop bar line.
    What the state law requires here is “you must make a complete stop at the stop bar line if one exists when facing a red light. The city claimed I violated the law by letting my front tire stop past the line, regardless of the fact I made the complete stop.
    My successful argument was this, “I cited that state law requires me to make a complete stop facing a red light, which I did. The law also specifies that this stop should be made at the stop bar line if there is one, which I also did. I reiterated the word at and gave the legal definition. At means ON, IN, OR NEAR.
    No where have they stated that I need to stop before or behind the line. In fact the only part in the statute where they do reference stopping before something is before you enter a crosswalk. I pressed the point and said if state law intended stopping before the line to be true, why not state it like they did with the crosswalk?
    I summarized by saying my vehicle was sitting fully stopped facing a red light at the stop bar line regardless of where my front tire was, and I had not entered any crosswalk. This follows the state statute that I allegedly violated. Citation was Dismissed both instances.
    It is a petty citation that law enforcement is trying to gain here. The law is just requiring people to come to complete stops near the sign or line. That reasonable, safe, and legal.
    You’ll probably have to show that the judge erred or did not appreciate all your facts pertaining to law. Maybe point out how the California law didn’t ask you to stop before the line but at the line per CVC 22450(a). Hopefully you claimed your vehicle was at least somewhere on the line in your declaration. You are typically not allowed to enter any new facts or evidence in Trial De Novo.
    Good luck this time.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    1,055

    Default Re: Failing to Stop at the Limit Line vs. at the Stop Sign

    Actually, you can enter whatever evidence is relevant at TDN, regardless of what your argument was at TBD. You can't enter new evidence on appeal, but that's not what we're talking about here.

    - - - Updated - - -

    "22450. (a) The driver of any vehicle approaching a stop sign at the
    entrance to, or within, an intersection shall stop at a limit line,
    if marked, otherwise before entering the crosswalk on the near side
    of the intersection.
    If there is no limit line or crosswalk, the driver shall stop at
    the entrance to the intersecting roadway."

    The crosswalk aspect appears not to be relevant here. I think you have two arguments here.

    1. Assuming the limit line is obscured or not maintained properly, you stopped at the intersection entrance instead. (This is the imaginary line made by a roadside curb or the otherwise extended near edge of the intersecting roadway.) I'd quit arguing you stopped at the sign as that's not the required place to stop.

    2. The word "at" does not imply "before." As pointed out above, the legal meaning or commonly accepted usage would be called for. I'd try to get the officer to testify about where your car was or what he would define as a correct stop for a vehicle. If he says no part of the vehicle could be past the limit line, for example, you might challenge is competency as a witness or as a police officer. Words like "prior to" or "before" are used elsewhere in the Vehicle Code and if the intention was to specify "before" then that word could have been used. Furthermore, at a crosswalk or limit line, depending on visual obstructions, you might not be able to see crossing traffic.

    If the officer testifies that you stopped in such a way as to block crossing traffic, you might have some trouble.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    23

    Default Re: Failing to Stop at the Limit Line vs. at the Stop Sign

    Actually, you can enter whatever evidence is relevant at TDN, regardless of what your argument was at TBD. You can't enter new evidence on appeal, but that's not what we're talking about here
    .

    Oh yes, I was thinking appeal.
    Thanks for correction!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Behind a Desk
    Posts
    98,846

    Default Re: Failing to Stop at the Limit Line vs. at the Stop Sign

    Quote Quoting Jim_bo
    View Post
    If the cop says you did, but you say you didn't, you are guilty.
    In fact, the court weighs the evidence and assesses, based on the evidence and (when possible) observations about the witnesses, which of the two competing versions of events is more likely to be true.
    Quote Quoting donzoh1
    View Post
    The word "at" does not imply "before." As pointed out above, the legal meaning or commonly accepted usage would be called for. I'd try to get the officer to testify about where your car was or what he would define as a correct stop for a vehicle. If he says no part of the vehicle could be past the limit line, for example, you might challenge is competency as a witness or as a police officer.
    All that proposed defense would do would be to call into question your be your capacity to read and understand the English language. It's a non-starter:
    Quote Quoting People v. Binkowski, 68 Cal. Rptr. 3d 741, 744 (Cal. App. Dep't Super. Ct. 2007), emphasis added.
    In determining legislative intent, we first examine the words of the statute, applying their ordinary and commonsense meaning. (People v. Granderson (1998) 67 Cal.App.4th 703, 707, 79 Cal.Rptr.2d 268.) Section 22340 requires stopping at the limit line. Vehicle Code section 377 defines "limit line" as the point at which traffic is required to stop. A "point" is defined "as a particular or precisely specified position, location, place, or spot." (Webster's New World Diet. (2d college ed.1976) p. 1100, col. 2.) A limit line would function as a "precisely specified position" only if a vehicle stopped when its front bumper reached that line. This is particularly true because vehicles vary greatly in length. If we accepted appellant's proposed interpretation, then a big rig truck would not violate the statute so long as its rear bumper had not yet cleared the limit line, even though its midsection could be straddling a crosswalk and its tractor could be protruding into the intersection. The Legislature could not have intended such an absurd—and potentially perilous—result. (Cf. People v. Coronado (1995) 12 Cal.4th 145, 151, 48 Cal.Rptr.2d 77, 906 P.2d 1232.)

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Officially across the country from where I've been all my life
    Posts
    4,494

    Default Re: Failing to Stop at the Limit Line vs. at the Stop Sign

    There is no case file in LA County....

    sorry. Everything is imaged. So asking to see your case file is gonna be... worthless.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    1,055

    Default Re: Failing to Stop at the Limit Line vs. at the Stop Sign

    Quote Quoting CourtClerk
    View Post
    There is no case file in LA County....

    sorry. Everything is imaged. So asking to see your case file is gonna be... worthless.
    So you don't call it a case file...you call it an image file? OK, then ask to see your image file or for copies of such file. The defendant has a right to see all of the evidence in their case and to see the officer's statement at TBD. (That's how many defendants decide whether or not to appeal their case.)

    Furthermore, whatever format LA County keeps records in is subject to the requirements of the California Public Records Act, unless you know of an exception that would allow it to be withheld when requested.

    Whether they keep their records in hard copy, digital, or whatever image format, and regardless of whether you personally were ever asked to retrieve such a file, they should be provided when requested. If they are not, it's yet another example of incompetence or indifference in the California Judicial System and yet another reason for the average person to distrust it.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Quoting Mr. Knowitall
    View Post
    In fact, the court weighs the evidence and assesses, based on the evidence and (when possible) observations about the witnesses, which of the two competing versions of events is more likely to be true.

    All that proposed defense would do would be to call into question your be your capacity to read and understand the English language. It's a non-starter:
    So if I read the court case correctly, a driver stopping with the bumper 1 inch short of the limit line and then proceeded would violate the statute? They certainly would according to the case law. How about 6 inches short of the limit line? I appreciate your comment about the language and all but it seems the people who have the real problem there work in Sacramento.

  9. #9

    Default Re: Failing to Stop at the Limit Line vs. at the Stop Sign

    I'm assuming that you were found guilty. If so, I'd assume the reason was because the cop said you didn't stop at all. The truth is irrelevant. If the cop says you did, but you say you didn't, you are guilty.

    Get a copy of the cop's statement.

    1. Sponsored Links
       

Similar Threads

  1. Lights, Signs and Traffic Controls: Defenses for Failing to Stop at the Limit Line for a Stop Sign
    By CATeacher in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 06-06-2014, 02:54 PM
  2. Lights, Signs and Traffic Controls: Stop Sign Has No Limit Line
    By legaltruth in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 09-18-2013, 07:19 AM
  3. Lights, Signs and Traffic Controls: Not Stopping Before the Limit Line for a Stop Sign
    By her0 in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 06-04-2011, 06:41 PM
  4. Lights, Signs and Traffic Controls: Fail to Stop at a Stop Sign in Federal Way, but Intersection Has Stop Line 15 Feet
    By gogodawgs in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 05-23-2011, 08:02 AM
  5. Lights, Signs and Traffic Controls: Failure to Stop at a Limit Line vs Stop Sign
    By fmontez in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 07-07-2008, 11:59 AM
 
 
Sponsored Links

Legal Help, Information and Resources