Two tickets in a single month =[
#16
04-21-2009, 11:31 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: CA
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
***** man this blows.
i can relate , im in SoCal and i got a ticket a few weeks ago 49 in a 25
i was running late to school, no cars what so ever on a straight road so i said F it and i gassed. as im passing 45 mph i see a BIKer cop in someone's drive way, immediately i shouted **** and got pulled over 5 seconds later. i got to school 10 minutes late and am now facing a $380 ticket
oh and the worst part is, when i got to school i checked my phone and saw a text from my mom saying "Cops at bottom of hill"
im still kicking myself in the ***** over this..
my luck
i can relate , im in SoCal and i got a ticket a few weeks ago 49 in a 25
i was running late to school, no cars what so ever on a straight road so i said F it and i gassed. as im passing 45 mph i see a BIKer cop in someone's drive way, immediately i shouted **** and got pulled over 5 seconds later. i got to school 10 minutes late and am now facing a $380 ticket
oh and the worst part is, when i got to school i checked my phone and saw a text from my mom saying "Cops at bottom of hill"
im still kicking myself in the ***** over this..
my luck
#19
05-08-2009, 05:31 PM
So I had trial yesterday from a citation I had received for 13 over in a 35mph zone on Feb 15, 2009.
I used the tipmra just like normal.
I was irritated that they kept postponing my name from the schedule because the officer that was to appear as a witness was late. My trial was set for 11:00am it began at 11:27am.
Before we began I stood at the podium, the previous day I had submitted my case law to the prosecutors office, I asked for the courts attention and stated that I had a series of case law and I asked the court take into consideration since our state has no case law in the matter of a speed violation trial so the wisdom of the high courts of sisters states should be considered. The bailiff approached me and took my case law and handed them to the judge. She asked me what each represented and I went down my list for a brief outline. She then asked the people if they were ready to begin and they responded that they were ready, the prosecutor stood up gave a brief opening argument and then called his first witness, which was Officer Tatton who had issued the citation on the morning of Feb 15th, 2009. He then asked the officer his name and to spell it out, who he was employed by and for how long, if he had issued the citation number, to whom he had issued it to, if he could identify that person here in the court, if he had certification that was pertinent to the violation he has issued, then he asked the big question I was waiting for, and that was what device did he operate on the day that the citation was issued and the officer responded a pro laser III lidar unit issued to him by his department. I immediately objected and stated "although there is ample judicial notice as to radar in this jurisdiction there exists none as to a laser speed measuring device nor is there notice of any daubert or frye hearing that has been conducted for such a device within this jurisdiction, I have provided case law that the high courts have concluded that in order for a scientific device to be admitted as evidence without judicial notice it must be accompanied by expert testimony by a recognized expert in the field of the said device." The prosecutor argued that LIDAR has been accepted previously by courts in previous cases. I objected once again stating "although the court may have accepted LIDAR in previous cases the people are required to produce an exact case where judicial notice was challenged and was taken within our jurisdiction if the people cannot produce expert testimony or produce a case in which this jurisdiction has taken judicial notice I object to any testimony from such a device"
The judge then asked the prosecutor if they could produce a previous case where judicial notice has been taken by the court or if they intend to provide expert testimony. The prosecutor told the judge that they think the courts have taken judicial notice and that the people do not have intentions to enter expert testimony and if there could be a 5 minute recess to locate a previous case where notice has been taken. I again objected and said "your honor with all due respect the trial is today the defense is prepared and ready to move forward and just because the people think that judicial notice exists does not mean it exists, the people should have come better prepared and I motion that we continue forward with the trial." The judge said that the defenses motion is granted and the defenses objection to testimony of the laser speed reading device is sustained. The prosecutor at this point had little more to go with, he asked the officer if he had perceived my vehicle speeding. I again objected, and said that the question was leading. Judge then sustained my objection, the prosecutor asked the question again saying "did you perceive the vehicle of the accused was operating traveling at a speed greater than was posted". The officer responded "yes and confirmed this with his lidar unit" I again objected stating "Your honor the court has sustained that no testimony is to be taken from the said device" the judge again sustained and had the clerk strike it from the record. The prosecutor said they had no further questions and the people rest.
The judge then told me that I could either ask the officer questions in order to cross examine or make a statement. I then said as clearly as possible "Your honor the people have rested, they have failed to produce evidence that the defendant had committed the alleged speed violation and have also failed to provide testimony as to where the alleged violation occurred and what the posted limit is where the alleged violation occurred, I motion for a directed verdict as the people have failed to prove their case" The judge wrote a few notes down and then looked at me and said defendant your motion is granted and your case is dismissed, you may exit the court.
I used the tipmra just like normal.
I was irritated that they kept postponing my name from the schedule because the officer that was to appear as a witness was late. My trial was set for 11:00am it began at 11:27am.
Before we began I stood at the podium, the previous day I had submitted my case law to the prosecutors office, I asked for the courts attention and stated that I had a series of case law and I asked the court take into consideration since our state has no case law in the matter of a speed violation trial so the wisdom of the high courts of sisters states should be considered. The bailiff approached me and took my case law and handed them to the judge. She asked me what each represented and I went down my list for a brief outline. She then asked the people if they were ready to begin and they responded that they were ready, the prosecutor stood up gave a brief opening argument and then called his first witness, which was Officer Tatton who had issued the citation on the morning of Feb 15th, 2009. He then asked the officer his name and to spell it out, who he was employed by and for how long, if he had issued the citation number, to whom he had issued it to, if he could identify that person here in the court, if he had certification that was pertinent to the violation he has issued, then he asked the big question I was waiting for, and that was what device did he operate on the day that the citation was issued and the officer responded a pro laser III lidar unit issued to him by his department. I immediately objected and stated "although there is ample judicial notice as to radar in this jurisdiction there exists none as to a laser speed measuring device nor is there notice of any daubert or frye hearing that has been conducted for such a device within this jurisdiction, I have provided case law that the high courts have concluded that in order for a scientific device to be admitted as evidence without judicial notice it must be accompanied by expert testimony by a recognized expert in the field of the said device." The prosecutor argued that LIDAR has been accepted previously by courts in previous cases. I objected once again stating "although the court may have accepted LIDAR in previous cases the people are required to produce an exact case where judicial notice was challenged and was taken within our jurisdiction if the people cannot produce expert testimony or produce a case in which this jurisdiction has taken judicial notice I object to any testimony from such a device"
The judge then asked the prosecutor if they could produce a previous case where judicial notice has been taken by the court or if they intend to provide expert testimony. The prosecutor told the judge that they think the courts have taken judicial notice and that the people do not have intentions to enter expert testimony and if there could be a 5 minute recess to locate a previous case where notice has been taken. I again objected and said "your honor with all due respect the trial is today the defense is prepared and ready to move forward and just because the people think that judicial notice exists does not mean it exists, the people should have come better prepared and I motion that we continue forward with the trial." The judge said that the defenses motion is granted and the defenses objection to testimony of the laser speed reading device is sustained. The prosecutor at this point had little more to go with, he asked the officer if he had perceived my vehicle speeding. I again objected, and said that the question was leading. Judge then sustained my objection, the prosecutor asked the question again saying "did you perceive the vehicle of the accused was operating traveling at a speed greater than was posted". The officer responded "yes and confirmed this with his lidar unit" I again objected stating "Your honor the court has sustained that no testimony is to be taken from the said device" the judge again sustained and had the clerk strike it from the record. The prosecutor said they had no further questions and the people rest.
The judge then told me that I could either ask the officer questions in order to cross examine or make a statement. I then said as clearly as possible "Your honor the people have rested, they have failed to produce evidence that the defendant had committed the alleged speed violation and have also failed to provide testimony as to where the alleged violation occurred and what the posted limit is where the alleged violation occurred, I motion for a directed verdict as the people have failed to prove their case" The judge wrote a few notes down and then looked at me and said defendant your motion is granted and your case is dismissed, you may exit the court.
Last edited by mykungfuisrusty; 05-08-2009 at 05:50 PM.
#20
05-08-2009, 05:38 PM
#21
05-08-2009, 05:39 PM
#22
05-08-2009, 05:45 PM
#24
05-08-2009, 06:15 PM
thank you.
if anyone ever dares to challenge a citation the tipmra is a terrific guide.
most people are not confident enough to do so and just pay their fine, guilty or not.
in my matter i was driving my passat that morning and was in no rush to be anywhere. i don't believe i was speeding or traveling at the speed i was charged with.
even if i couldn't have had the evidence thrown out i know with the questions i would have had lined up for the officer in cross examination would have been sufficient enough to riddle the peoples case with too much doubt that a not guilty verdict should be the only verdict entered. i was also prepared to ambush the people with demand to produce a traffic engineering survey as required by CFR 23 in a speed violation trial and the supporting case law from federal courts. if the people could not produce this survey i would have argued that without that document the court would have to recognize that the posted speed limit is arbitrary and capricious and could not be enforced by state or municipal law enforcement. in that event too the court could have provided a dismissal and allow the people to produce the survey at a later time and reassess the charge once again if they demanded a retrial regardless of the circumstance of double jeopardy.
all i can say is the tipmra works and best of all it is free.
if anyone ever dares to challenge a citation the tipmra is a terrific guide.
most people are not confident enough to do so and just pay their fine, guilty or not.
in my matter i was driving my passat that morning and was in no rush to be anywhere. i don't believe i was speeding or traveling at the speed i was charged with.
even if i couldn't have had the evidence thrown out i know with the questions i would have had lined up for the officer in cross examination would have been sufficient enough to riddle the peoples case with too much doubt that a not guilty verdict should be the only verdict entered. i was also prepared to ambush the people with demand to produce a traffic engineering survey as required by CFR 23 in a speed violation trial and the supporting case law from federal courts. if the people could not produce this survey i would have argued that without that document the court would have to recognize that the posted speed limit is arbitrary and capricious and could not be enforced by state or municipal law enforcement. in that event too the court could have provided a dismissal and allow the people to produce the survey at a later time and reassess the charge once again if they demanded a retrial regardless of the circumstance of double jeopardy.
all i can say is the tipmra works and best of all it is free.
#25
07-14-2010, 06:59 PM
speeding ticket help site
I found an interesting site that has legal information on how to beat a speeding ticket in court. They say many municipalities are writing WAY more tickets than last year to generate revenue during this economy. The only way to beat a ticket is using the legal system against them.
Here's the <a href="http://www.BeatMySpeedingTicket.com">beat speeding tickets</a> site if you have a ticket.
Here's the <a href="http://www.BeatMySpeedingTicket.com">beat speeding tickets</a> site if you have a ticket.
#27
07-15-2010, 10:43 AM
Get yourself a good radar/laser detector. Mine has paid for itself many times over. Even when the officer is not actively using the radar they often leave them on at low power. This lets me know they are in the immediate area. And yes, the laser detector works. Contrary to popular belief, the beam will scatter after hitting a target. The burst will be short so you have to pay attention. I was saved from lidar by my detector.
It does help if there are hills, curves and trees on the sides of the road for signals to bounce off. I know when there is a radar unit working long before the cop can even see me. Even the instant on radar will be detected before it's too late
It does help if there are hills, curves and trees on the sides of the road for signals to bounce off. I know when there is a radar unit working long before the cop can even see me. Even the instant on radar will be detected before it's too late
#28
07-15-2010, 03:12 PM
lets me put my 2 cent in here... in the state of florida.. the stop sign or traffic light is a moving volition.. about 180's just pay that ticket, but the one u got for 30 over.. u are talking about 3 or 400 bucks.. but since u aint had a ticket in 4 years.. u can do two things op for driving school.. no points on ya record or u can go to court and let then judge look at ya record.. it might be a fine of court cost.. if u have a good reason for 30 over.. make up some crap.. that can be believable. and a side note.. they can take u to jail for 30 over on the spot..
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
alxmlr789
20 Inch
9
01-26-2016 10:04 AM
