Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 11 to 13 of 13
  1. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    19,246

    Default Re: 21657 21750

    The authorities in charge of any highway may designate any highway, roadway, part of a roadway, or specific lanes upon which vehicular traffic shall proceed in one direction at all or such times as shall be indicated by official traffic control devices. When a roadway has been so designated, a vehicle shall be driven only in the direction designated at all or such times as shall be indicated by traffic control devices.

  2. #12

    Default Re: 21657 21750

    I took a closer look at it.

    21657a is two parts.

    The first sentence gives the authorization for the authorities to designate basically any part of a roadway or highway as one direction.

    The second sentence is the part of the statute that drivers must follow. It applies to one direction roadways only. It clearly says, when a roadway has been so designated. Given the first sentence it is obvious that "roadway" is not analogous to "part of a roadway" or "specific lanes". Had the legislature intended for the second part of 21657a to be enforced on single lane designations or part of road designations they would have written something like; "When such a designation has been made..." or "When a highway, roadway, part of a roadway or specific lane has been so designated...". Therefore a 21657 cite can only be given on one way streets with the proper designations.

    Someone may try to counter this and say that when the legislature wrote "When a roadway has been so designated" it is referring to any type of of the previously listed designations that may be in the roadway. This is a weak counter argument becasue in the very same section a distinction was clearly made between a roadway, a highway, part of roadway, or specific lanes. For the legislature to make a distinction in the first sentence but then use roadway in a broad sense in the second would be inconsistent and does not make sense. If this is their intention it's an error that should be corrected but in the mean time the defendant should be acquitted. Also with this arguement the "so" part of that sentence would be referring to any of the four types of desinations but that is not the case. "So" refers to how the destinations are made, they must be one direction designations made using OTCDs.

    A defense for 21657 could be as simple as asking the officer two questions; "At the location of the violation, was the entire roadway designated for single direction travel?" "At the location of the violation, was part of the roadway designated for single direction travel?", then presenting the above. The defendant would not need to testify.

  3. #13

    Default Re: 21657 21750

    Looking at the photo, you entered a two way left turn lane to pass traffic. You should have been cited for cvc 21460.5(c) but instead the officer chose other sections for reasons we may never know

    1. Sponsored Links
       

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

Similar Threads

  1. Traffic Lane Violations: Ticket for a One-Way Road Violation With Temporary Signage, VC 21657
    By cstoner11 in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 02-07-2014, 07:47 AM
  2. Traffic Lane Violations: CVC 21750 Lane Change Violation
    By scorpione1977 in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-05-2011, 11:27 AM
  3. Lights, Signs and Traffic Controls: Designated Traffic Direction Violation, VC 21657
    By coach41 in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-19-2011, 11:26 PM
 
 
Sponsored Links

Legal Help, Information and Resources