Cal Club Autocross Forums

Hi guys
Last August I was driving my x-girfriend’s BMW X5 south bound on US-101 south of SR-156 outside of Monterey and I was pulled over by the police for speeding.
At that point the road was going uphill and the police officer was hiding right after the top of the hill .
I reached the top of the hill at the same time with the car at the lane next to me and when I saw him I stepped at the brakes right away.
The police car followed me for a couple of miles (while I was doing 60 mph) and eventually pulled me over.
He told me that I was doing 77 mph in a 60mph zone. I honestly didn't think I was going that fast so asked him how he clocked my speed and he said that he used his rear radar (mounted in his crown vic), he also told me that he erased the radar screen so he can't show it to me.
A few minutes later when I stepped out of the vehicle I saw his radar screen showing 72 mph. On my question he said that he charged me for 77mph just because he saw me braking so he assumed I was at least going with 77 mph.

Anyway long story short I did trial by declaration where I didn’t mentioned any of these (since I have no proof – wanted to take a picture by my camera was dead at that point) - I just used the typical beam angle (spread) issue and the fact that I was next to another car.
My claim was rejected but since I really don’t want this ticket in my somehow heavy record (total 3 speeding tickets all of 10-15 mph above the limit) I decided to request Trial De Novo.

I was hoping that this will be in 6 months or so… but it’s actually next Monday!

I never really been at the court so I’m not sure what are my options if I don’t want to spend tons of money and hiring a layer.

Should I plead guilty or not guilty?
From what I recall they first ask you that and then check if the police officer is there right?
Should I mention the above story of what really happened or it would just make things worse?

I’m sorry for the probably a bit silly questions but I just have not too much experience with courts…

Thanks
Chris

Christos Adam wrote:Hi guys
Last August I was driving my x-girfriend’s BMW X5 south bound on US-101 south of SR-156 outside of Monterey and I was pulled over by the police for speeding.
At that point the road was going uphill and the police officer was hiding right after the top of the hill .
I reached the top of the hill at the same time with the car at the lane next to me and when I saw him I stepped at the brakes right away.
The police car followed me for a couple of miles (while I was doing 60 mph) and eventually pulled me over.
He told me that I was doing 77 mph in a 60mph zone. I honestly didn't think I was going that fast so asked him how he clocked my speed and he said that he used his rear radar (mounted in his crown vic), he also told me that he erased the radar screen so he can't show it to me.
A few minutes later when I stepped out of the vehicle I saw his radar screen showing 72 mph. On my question he said that he charged me for 77mph just because he saw me braking so he assumed I was at least going with 77 mph.

Anyway long story short I did trial by declaration where I didn’t mentioned any of these (since I have no proof – wanted to take a picture by my camera was dead at that point) - I just used the typical beam angle (spread) issue and the fact that I was next to another car.
My claim was rejected but since I really don’t want this ticket in my somehow heavy record (total 3 speeding tickets all of 10-15 mph above the limit) I decided to request Trial De Novo.

I was hoping that this will be in 6 months or so… but it’s actually next Monday!

I never really been at the court so I’m not sure what are my options if I don’t want to spend tons of money and hiring a layer.

Should I plead guilty or not guilty?
From what I recall they first ask you that and then check if the police officer is there right?
Should I mention the above story of what really happened or it would just make things worse?

I’m sorry for the probably a bit silly questions but I just have not too much experience with courts…

Thanks
Chris

Hopefully the cop won't show and you're off the hook. If he does show, you can use the same arguments as in the trial by declaration. Best to only argue the law and find loopholes where you can. Did he write you up for a 22350 if 22349?

He wrote me for violating the CVC 22350. What is the difference between 49 and 50?

22349. (a) Except as provided in Section 22356, no person may drive a vehicle upon a highway at a speed greater than 65 miles per hour.
(b) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person may drive a vehicle upon a two-lane, undivided highway at a speed greater than 55 miles per hour unless that highway, or portion thereof, has been posted for a higher speed by the Department of Transportation or appropriate local agency upon the basis of an engineering and traffic survey. For purposes of this subdivision, the following apply:

(1) A two-lane, undivided highway is a highway with not more than one through lane of travel in each direction.

(2) Passing lanes may not be considered when determining the number of through lanes.

(c) It is the intent of the Legislature that there be reasonable signing on affected two-lane, undivided highways described in subdivision (b) in continuing the 55 miles-per-hour speed limit, including placing signs at county boundaries to the extent possible, and at other appropriate locations.


22350. No person shall drive a vehicle upon a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable or prudent having due regard for weather, visibility, the traffic on, and the surface and width of, the highway, and in no event at a speed which endangers the safety of persons or property.


http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/vc/tocd11c7a1.htm

Typically de novo is limited to what was done with the previous evidence. I.E. procedural errors. New evidence is only allowable if you have a sound reason it was unavailable to you at the previous hearing. Like a traffic-cam picture shows up in the mail only after your hearing and proves it wasn't you. Since the previous facts are already "in evidence", I'm not sure the cop even has to appear. But if it works out, let us know.

The facts might be set but the veracity has not been adjudicated, so I'm not sure what would let the cop off the hook for appearing. Gov't has to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and the defendant has the right to confront witnesses against him. Sometimes the judge does need to be reminded (politely and with respect) that the constitution of the United States of America does in fact have jurisdiction in traffic court.

Bill Martin wrote:Typically de novo is limited to what was done with the previous evidence. I.E. procedural errors. New evidence is only allowable if you have a sound reason it was unavailable to you at the previous hearing. Like a traffic-cam picture shows up in the mail only after your hearing and proves it wasn't you. Since the previous facts are already "in evidence", I'm not sure the cop even has to appear. But if it works out, let us know.

With all due respect Bill, this is not an appeal. This is a new trial. The trial by declaration is moot.

Christos Adam wrote:He wrote me for violating the CVC 22350. What is the difference between 49 and 50?

You caught a break here. A 22349 is much harder to fight. For a 22350, the officer has to prove you were driving in an unsafe manner. How fast you were going is somewhat irrelevant. Do some research on the net. All the answers are there. If you were otherwise driving safely, with the proper line of questioning, you can get out of this even if the officer shows up.

If after all this you are found guilty, don't but the crap judges like to pull about you can't go to traffic school if you have a trial. This is BS and is not backed by law. I seems they all like to give this speech to entice guilty pleas. There is case law you can find in this regard also. Request traffic school if found guilty and be prepared to cite case law if the judge denies your request.

You can beat this.

You need to get as many extensions allowable. Its easy just call the number on the ticket and get an extension for when your bail is due, then when you get your court date get another extension. You want to drag it out as long as possible. If you do a trial by declaration you are still allowed to get a court date if the judge rules against you (I think), dragging it on even longer. You could probably even get an extension on the trial by declaration. The longer it takes the better your chances of the cop just forgetting about you. Its worth not getting the ticket.

Joey Schilling wrote:You need to get as many extensions allowable. Its easy just call the number on the ticket and get an extension for when your bail is due, then when you get your court date get another extension. You want to drag it out as long as possible. If you do a trial by declaration you are still allowed to get a court date if the judge rules against you (I think), dragging it on even longer. You could probably even get an extension on the trial by declaration. The longer it takes the better your chances of the cop just forgetting about you. Its worth not getting the ticket.

+1. I was able to string my last ticket out for almost a year.

Haven't had a ticket for over 40 years, so I'm probably over due. I do the dumb stuff just like everyone, just been lucky. When it happens, and after I stop whining, I'll check this forum for help.

Joey Schilling wrote:You need to get as many extensions allowable. Its easy just call the number on the ticket and get an extension for when your bail is due, then when you get your court date get another extension. You want to drag it out as long as possible. If you do a trial by declaration you are still allowed to get a court date if the judge rules against you (I think), dragging it on even longer. You could probably even get an extension on the trial by declaration. The longer it takes the better your chances of the cop just forgetting about you. Its worth not getting the ticket.

+1 drag it out

Joey Schilling wrote:You need to get as many extensions allowable. Its easy just call the number on the ticket and get an extension for when your bail is due

NO need to call...you can do it online as soon as you GET your ticket. The due date is usually 2 months away. extension (1 only) is another 2 months. Then pay bail with TBD. Fight it. If pass..great. If fail...trial de nuovo. Get court date. Get extension. Then go to court. Pray cop doesn't show. If he does. Ask for traffic school. As others said...EXTEND!

Also go to TicketAssassin.com. I fought and won TBD.

Giovanni Jaramillo wrote:Also go to TicketAssassin.com

Just don't pay for it. I did, and the guy who set up the site is completely AWOL. Never ever got any kind of response or support, despite sending several emails.

BTW-That section of US-101 is notorious for speed traps.

George Schilling wrote: With all due respect Bill, this is not an appeal. This is a new trial. The trial by declaration is moot.

Turns out you're right -- and a little wrong. It is by definition an appeal. But the California Vehicle Code formats it as a new trial as if the original had not happened. So the officer must appear. So verbage aside, it is a new trial. Here's the full dope: http://www.ticketassassin.com/fight.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Kurt Rahn wrote:

Giovanni Jaramillo wrote:Also go to TicketAssassin.com

Just don't pay for it. I did, and the guy who set up the site is completely AWOL. Never ever got any kind of response or support, despite sending several emails.

Exactly, I've sent several e-mails for the 2nd time but the first time I did get a response (years ago).

Thank you guys.
I tried to drag it as much as possible, I took the first extension and then requested TBD.
When TBD results came and were against me I mailed the requested a trial (on the last day of the deadline).
I guess I could have called an ask for a new trial (probably in a month) but next month we have a lot of National events and I didn't want to be occupied with the trial. I also head that the second extension it's difficult to happen.

My main concern now is what I should declare at the court.
During the last 3 years I have gotten about 3 speeding tickets (granted all of them for less than 15 mph) but still I would like if it's possible to request traffic school and clean up my record.
I heard that there is an "unwritten" rule saying that if you declare "not guilty" you don't get traffic school.
Is that correct?

I also from what I remember (from when I was there with a friend) that they first ask you to state "guilty/not guilty" and then they call the police officers.
So my concern is that if I say guilty even if I'm lucky enough and the police officer doesn't show up, I'll still get the ticket...
Is the above description correct?
If that's the case I need to declare not guilty and at least risk it all the way...

Christos Adam wrote:I heard that there is an "unwritten" rule saying that if you declare "not guilty" you don't get traffic school.
Is that correct?

The judge may threaten this but there is case law that says otherwise. You need to do some research and be prepared to cite this is if you go to trial and lose. See my other post above.

I also from what I remember (from when I was there with a friend) that they first ask you to state "guilty/not guilty" and then they call the police officers.

Every court operates differently.

So my concern is that if I say guilty even if I'm lucky enough and the police officer doesn't show up, I'll still get the ticket...

Never say you're guilty.

Like I said above, you can win this if you're willing to do the research. If you just hoping the officer doesn't show, go and take your chances. If you want to win whether he shows or not, you're going to have to spend 2-3 hours in front of a computer searching for an appropriate defense and be able to cite case law. They're not going to let you off for being a friendly guy.

Thank you George, I'll do my homework and prepare for this!

Bring lube - a pretty boy like you will need it in the slammer.

Max Hayter wrote:Bring lube - a pretty boy like you will need it in the slammer.

Max speaks from experience :barf:

Tom Denham wrote:

Max Hayter wrote:Bring lube - a pretty boy like you will need it in the slammer.

Max speaks from experience :barf:

Ok if that's the case I'll bring some K&Y Jelly just in case :gpower:

So yesterday night I came back from my trip to Monteray (what I shame being that close to Laguna Seca and not going in the track for a spin).
I defended myself for 30 min and I lost but gracefully.
I bought a book and I prepared (in my mind) quite a few questions but it seems that the police officer had done his work (collecting all the data he needed) and (even though hard to say it) he deserved to win.
The whole atmosphere in the courtroom was very nice and the officer answered all of my questions patiently and with really good attitude. Nobody seemed to be getting pissed feeling that I wasted their time. The judge actually commented at the end of the process that my questions were very good...but the police officer had really done his homework while I wasn't as prepared as well as I could (since I haven't had taken any notes when I got pulled over - next time you get pulled over remember to take notes and if it's possible your gps location).
At the end of the process I asked to get my fine reduced but the judge denied that since I have had 3 tickets within the last 2 years... but he did allow me to attend Level II traffic school (12 hours and $149).

So here is the aftermath:
Romantic weekend in Napa Valley $2K (in August)

Speeding ticket on the way back from Napa Valley
Bail $430
Fed EX TBD $15
Fed Ex the letter to the court Trial De Novo $15
Hotel @ Monteray for the night before the trial $75
Gas (Audi A6 27mpg) $120
Buying Book how to beat your ticket $30
Traffic school/court fee $60
Traffic School fee $90
taking the day off and wasting it driving up and down in Monteray... priceless

You gave it your best shot, now get a V1 (radar detector).