Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 11 to 20 of 20
  1. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    152

    Default Re: Incomplete Officer Statement

    So whose burden is it to show that the distance and the extra speed was within the amount "necessary to complete the pass with a reasonable margin of safety"? Is it sufficient to testify that in my opinion the speed and distance were "safe"? If the officer is not present to testify, there will be no argument against that, and the defendant should win? In the absence of testimony from prosecution that disputes the testimony from the defendant, the testimony from the defendant should stand as stated, right?

    And what constitutes a speed too high to be justified? The faster you go, the sooner you complete the pass, which is why this law is written in the first place. I suppose that you could not justify speeding at 100 mph to pass bikes at 20 mph, as you would have passed them well before you finished accelerating to 100 mph, but 37 mph feels perfectly justifiable. I sure hope you win in this case, IMO this is going exactly by the book. I know "some people" who do this frequently, so would want to know how good is this defense. Please post how your case turns out.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    1,383

    Default Re: Incomplete Officer Statement

    I haven't seen all of the facts in this case and giving an opinion without all the facts is highly undesirable.

    If it was a two lane road with one lane in each direction, and the markings on the pavement indicated that it was safe to pass, you will prevail. That is, unless the LEO said you were in a different location or had something in his report to indicate that it was not a safe area to pass.

    Burden of proof is now upon you as the defendant for this affirmative defense. This means you must provide testimony and can be cross-examined by a DPA. Good luck.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    8,238

    Default Re: Incomplete Officer Statement

    Quote Quoting prusakolep
    View Post
    So whose burden is it to show that the distance and the extra speed was within the amount "necessary to complete the pass with a reasonable margin of safety"? Is it sufficient to testify that in my opinion the speed and distance were "safe"? If the officer is not present to testify, there will be no argument against that, and the defendant should win? In the absence of testimony from prosecution that disputes the testimony from the defendant, the testimony from the defendant should stand as stated, right?

    It is your burden to prove the defense. Your own testimony is not necessarily enough to win. The judge must find your testimony credible. The prosecutor will be able to cross-examine you and point out every weakness or missing point in your testimony. As you are biased in the matter the court will likely give less weight to your version of events because you have an interest in avoiding the ticket. With that in mind, of course you’d have the opinion it was safe to pass. How much is that opinion worth given the bias I just pointed out? Perhaps not a whole lot. And there is still the issue of proving the speed of the bicyclists. A sharp prosecutor will zero in on the lack of proof concerning the speed they were going. If they were going 25 mph, then technically the statute does not allow you to exceed the speed limit to pass, even if you could do so safely. I’m not saying you won’t win; I'm just saying it's certainly not a slam dunk you will win.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    152

    Default Re: Incomplete Officer Statement

    FWIW, it is not my case to fight. And I was in traffic court in WA only 3 times, so my experience is limited (though I have a feeling that few folks on this thread besides Brendan and Speedy were even 3 times in WA traffic court). In these 3 times I saw judges make a good effort to hear out the defendants when they are not putting up BS arguments, and accepting the defendants testimony when prosecution does not object to it. And prosecution is frequently not present when defendants are not represented by a lawyer. Out of all the defenses discussed on this forum, I would feel most confident with this one. This defense is not a technicality, it is actually arguing that you are following the law. I seriously doubt that a judge in WA traffic court would really expect proof from the defendant about the speed of the bikes, or analysis why they feel their speed was justified under this statute. Let's see how this case actually turns out.

  5. #15

    Default Re: Incomplete Officer Statement

    Today was court. Fine was dismissed. In short, RCW46.61.755(1) Establishes that bicycles are vehicles. RCW 46.61.425 Establishes it is legal to exceed the speed limit to pass slow moving vehicles. Resident expert PFFFFT. I am a legal novice and know more in 30 minutes of research.

    Quote Quoting prusakolep
    View Post
    FWIW, it is not my case to fight. And I was in traffic court in WA only 3 times, so my experience is limited (though I have a feeling that few folks on this thread besides Brendan and Speedy were even 3 times in WA traffic court). In these 3 times I saw judges make a good effort to hear out the defendants when they are not putting up BS arguments, and accepting the defendants testimony when prosecution does not object to it. And prosecution is frequently not present when defendants are not represented by a lawyer. Out of all the defenses discussed on this forum, I would feel most confident with this one. This defense is not a technicality, it is actually arguing that you are following the law. I seriously doubt that a judge in WA traffic court would really expect proof from the defendant about the speed of the bikes, or analysis why they feel their speed was justified under this statute. Let's see how this case actually turns out.
    You are exactly correct!

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Snohomish, WA
    Posts
    1,588

    Default Re: Incomplete Officer Statement

    Congratulations on the win, but try to remember we don't get paid for volunteering our time or help on this site. You could also lower the volume of your smug and it would do you well in life.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Behind a Desk
    Posts
    98,846

    Default Re: Incomplete Officer Statement

    Quote Quoting Manimal
    View Post
    Today was court. Fine was dismissed. In short, RCW46.61.755(1) Establishes that bicycles are vehicles. RCW 46.61.425 Establishes it is legal to exceed the speed limit to pass slow moving vehicles. Resident expert PFFFFT.
    The law provides an exception "That a person following a vehicle driving at less than the legal maximum speed and desiring to pass such vehicle may exceed the speed limit, subject to the provisions of RCW 46.61.120 on highways having only one lane of traffic in each direction, at only such a speed and for only such a distance as is necessary to complete the pass with a reasonable margin of safety."

    Washington's cost-saving measures certainly do give the defendant an advantage when the court is operating off of an officer's written statement, and we've seen plenty in this forum that are deeply flawed or incomplete. To the extent that the stated defense worked, assuming a marginally competent judge, it would be predicated upon flaws of that nature, as the statutory exception does not even provide that you can speed while passing under all circumstances (in some contexts it will be unnecessary to speed in order to complete the pass) let alone create some sort of carte blanche defense to speeding tickets received for dangerous passing.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Snohomish, WA
    Posts
    1,588

    Default Re: Incomplete Officer Statement

    Agreed. It was a crap-shoot win as far as I am concerned and that was exactly the point I made, yet was "proven" wrong because a judge allowed the behavior to fly. The bottom line is that not every judge will agree with the OP's argument. It is an odd duck, Washington.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    152

    Default Re: Incomplete Officer Statement

    I disagree. You guys know very well about the lax treatment by WA traffic court judges, many of whom cut slack to defendants who are not lawyers and are making a legal argument (as opposed to just saying "I didn't do it, like 90% defendants do). I won't say that I or the OP were "proven" right or that you were "proven" wrong, that's not the point, and a single event does not constitute any proof. But when you give advice to people for WA traffic court cases you should take into account that the bar is lower here.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    886

    Default Re: Incomplete Officer Statement

    Prusakolep, I have to say that I am largely in agreement with everything you have stated on this thread. I have seen dismissals or findings of “not committed” for arguments far weaker than the one presented here, and this OP obviously had decided to accept any risk of losing.

    I once even heard a judge effectively state that although the defendant technically committed the infraction she would nevertheless enter a finding of “not committed” in the interest of justice, because she believed the defendant made the safest possible choice under the circumstances. So I think it is true that many traffic judges do cut slack, but all defendants need to weigh the risk of losing with other available options.

    1. Sponsored Links
       

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

Similar Threads

  1. Discovery: Officer's Sworn Statement for a Speeding Ticket is Missing Important Details
    By Brodi in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 02-14-2015, 04:38 AM
  2. Speeding Tickets: Speeding Ticket in Washington State (Officer's Statement and Radar Cert Included)
    By Sonic77777 in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 08-30-2011, 07:56 PM
  3. Speeding Tickets: Washington Speeding: Wrong Date in Officer's Statement
    By skisteven1 in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 02-26-2010, 02:42 AM
  4. Speeding Tickets: Incomplete Speeding Ticket
    By goliap1 in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-18-2009, 08:58 PM
  5. Speeding Tickets: Incomplete Speeding Ticket in New Jersey
    By Brin88 in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-19-2006, 10:02 AM
 
 
Sponsored Links

Legal Help, Information and Resources