LIDAR Ticket Win in CA

[austinado16]

First off, I'd like to say hello to everyone, and thank Roy for having such an outstanding website and forum. What an amazing resource!

I recently received a LIDAR speeding ticket for 22350CVC (unsafe speed) for allegedly traveling 48 in a 30, in town. There were all kinds of problems with the citation from the word go......no date and time for the court appearance, no direction of travel, the speed written on the citation was actually higher than the speed the motorcycle officer told me he'd picked me up at, and most importantly, my speed was neither unsafe, nor was it any different than any of the cars I was traveling with.

I began my fight with a trip through the forum here. Found a ton of great information, fantastic advice from pmoth and suf daddy, people posting the questions they used, and of course, those 2 great movies shot in the UK showing pan effect and reflection effect errors that are possible with LIDAR.

I decided not to do a trial by declaration, request any discovery, or a continuance, and just take the thing head on.

Here was my reasoning:
1) I liked the idea of getting a "do-over" with the trial by declaration, but didn't want a potential defeat stacked against me.

2) I didn't want to do any discovery because I wanted to keep my game plan from the prosecution. I figured if I started asking for all sorts of documentation, that would give the other side a look at where I was heading, and allow them to be better prepared. I wanted to look like a nobody who was just going to walk in, not knowing anything, stammer through a train wreck of a defense, and easily be found guilty.

3) I didn't want a continuance because I wanted to take this on and get it done. I also didn't want to look like I was trying to milk it out.

Using the information I found here, and on a couple of other sites, I put together a defense of:
1) Challenge the charge of: "22350cvc. 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"

I was going to take that apart, element by element, in order to prove that my speed was reasonable and prudent.

2) Challange the use and accuracy of the LIDAR unit, including it's calibration certificates.

3) Challenge the posted speed under the speed trap laws.

4) Challenge the competency of the officer since he couldn't keep his facts straight or fill in the citation accurately/completely.

My plan worked well, and things fell into play nicely in court. The 9-1/2 year veteran motorcycle officer showed up cavalier and completely unprepared. The judge started walking the officer down the rosie path of testifying by prompting him through all the required technical questions:

State your name and who you work for.
How long have you been a police officer?
How was the speed reading taken?
Do you have a certificate for the LIDAR?
Did you calibrate your LIDAR?
What did you see the defendant do?

I could tell the judge was very pro-law enforcement because it was like watching a parent walk their 5 year old through a school recital.

However, I was not prepared to hear the officer "modify" what really happened in order to make his case for unsafe speed sound so credible. Amazing. According to the officer, I was changing lanes, passing people, leading the pack..... Funny thing is, in reality, he couldn't actually see the section of roadway where he alleged all this lane changing and passing took place (and I'd brought photos to prove it). Not to mention that he couldn't even remember which block he was parked in.

Then the judge turned to me, "Would you like to tell your side of the story?" I'm thinking......what, are we in the principal's office in elementary school?

"Actually, with your Honor's permission, I'd like to cross-examine the witness." The judge was not happy to hear that this was going to wind up being an actual trial, and not just a he-said-she-said.

I began asking about the elements of 22350......one element at a time. Turns out, according to the officer, my speed wasn't unsafe with regard to weather, visibility, road surface, pedestrians, proximaty of cars around me, and that I wasn't driving erratically, or about to lose control. But then we got to the "with regard to the width of the road" question. Suddenly, my speed was not safe. The officer couldn't remember that there's a center turn lane, but he was willing to admit that this is one of the widest roads in town. However, he didn't know how wide it was. He added to that, that I could have crashed, (I pointed out that was a nice supposition, but it wasn't based on reality. I didn't crash and wasn't looking like I was going to crash.....as he'd just testified to) but when I re-asked how was my driving, we got back to the previous answers....safe.

The judge was not impressed with my questions. He challenged that I couldn't take 22350 apart like that, that it was a citation based on the "whole picture" not just road width by itself, or weather by itself or any of the other elements by themselves. He did not like when I stated I wasn't taking anything by itself, I just wanted to see how my speed was unsafe given all the elements of 22350. Heck, I even had the officer read 22350 outloud for the court. That was pretty funny.

I finished with my cross regarding 22350, and brought out my questions for the use of LIDAR. "Officer, isn't it true you measured my speed using LIDAR?"
"YES."
"Your Honor, with your permission, I'd like to see the certified calibration certificate for the LIDAR unit that he was using."

You could hear a pin drop. You see......back when the judge was walking the officer down the rosie path, he merely asked if there was a certificate and of course the officer had said yes. Apparently they thought I was going to fall for that one. I wasn't, but I was willing to be patient and let them hang themselves.

"I don't know where it is. Officer, please find the certificate."
"We mailed them to the court back in Sept. '06, so you should have them here."
"Well, there are some books there in front of my desk, look there."

I folded my hands in front of me, kept a pleasant look on my face and watched the circus show. The entire time I'm thinking; right, if this were me not being able to find something, the Judge would have told me too bad, "move on."

The officer went through 3 or 4, 4" thick 3 ring binders.......nothing. Then he asked the Judge's secretary to look through her stuff. Then the Judge started digging through binders. Then the officer turned to one of his fellow officers and asked to use their cell phone to call the dept and get the certs brought up. The the Judge asked the secretary to make some calls to the other departments in the court house and see if they had them......

.....While the secretary was on the phone, the Judge said, "Let's move on. Officer, do you have the engineering traffic survey?

"Yes"

"When was that done"

"2002" (So it's older than 5 years and out of date........dismissal)

"What does it say is the 85th percentile speed?"

"44mph" (So it's a speed trap because they have a speed posted lower than the first 5mph below the 85th percentile.............dismissal)

"And what is the recommended safe speed?"

"40mph your honor" (and the speed is posted for 30 and I got a ticket for 8mph over the recommended safe speed...........dismissal)

And then the secretary got off the phone......

"Your honor, 'she' says it's not the court's responsibility to maintain these certificates, it's the police department's."

"Case Dismissed"

The fine would have been $211, I probably would have lost my "Good Driver" insurance discount for 3 years, and paid another $300 or so in increased insurance fees.

Thanks again for all the help presented on this forum.

[Obsidian]

Nice job. Funny thing about the judge saying you can't tear the 22350 down by its individual elements, becase the California court of appeals disagrees ... see People V. Huffman & People V. Behjat.

"[2] No conviction can be sustained unless the record contains substantial evidence supporting each element of the charged offense. (People v. Johnson (1980)"

-Obsidian-

[austinado16]

When the Judge went into his long disertation about taking 22350 apart, I knew I was screwed. He gave me some examples of safe and unsafe speed........they were total BS........but he was putting me on notice what his opinion about my case already was.

I stayed calm, because if there's one thing I've learned in court, if you see the other side rattling sabers, you know they've got something to hide. It's the whole "kill the messenger" approach.

The officer was getting red faced and gesturing with his hands about how I could have crashed, and there was the Judge, all wrapped around the axle about me taking apart his precious 22350.

I could tell the wheels were about to come off, and I loved every minute of it.

I actually had that case law printed out, along with numerous others and it was going to make for an outstanding fall back position.

[Eloi]

Excellent report Austinado.

What do you do for living ? Just curious ... 8)

[austinado16]

Who me? I'm just a stay-at-home dad.

Although, 7 years ago I was a LEO; a traffic officer certified in RADAR.

[Eloi]

7 years ago I was a LEO; a traffic officer certified in RADAR.

So you crossed the bridge to the dark side .... 8)

With your experience , what would you do to really improve
road safety ? At the exception of radar/laser enforcement .

Personnaly I think that the actual speed-o-phobia is a dead end.

[austinado16]

Originally Posted by Eloi

So you crossed the bridge to the dark side .... 8)

With your experience , what would you do to really improve
road safety ? At the exception of radar/laser enforcement .

Personnaly I think that the actual speed-o-phobia is a dead end.

I still have a lot of respect for LEO's. There are a lot of great people out there on the job.

My career ended following the DUI arrest of another agency's Captain's 30-something year old son. Apparently there ARE people who are above the law. My own Dept. created a tidy little I.A. surrounding an unrelated arrest, and then magically I was ordered not to respond to any further court subpoena's pending my termination. The 30-something's case was subsequently dropped when "the officer failed to appear."

Needless to say.....I think I've seen the real dark side.

As to road safety. Geez, there's a never ending battle. How can anyone surmount things like road design and condition, increased traffic volumn, everyone talking on cell phones, the automotive world selling ego tripping go-fast horsepower, the speed at which we all like to drive, and factors of driver skill, age, DUI's, weather and all the rest of it? It's not like we can make everything 4 lanes with a K wall down the middle (I wish!).

All I can say is that speed is a big contributing factor. Hate to sound like a broken record, but it's true. Imagine taking down the speed limit signs and just letting the chips fall where they may. It'd be all fun and games until you pulled out of your driveway and got T-boned by some guy flying through your neighborhood at 50. Or get rear-ended by some guy doing 60+ down the main drag.

This argument is always a can of worms especially in a venue like this. I'm definately not here to shake the "slow down" finger at anyone, but I'm also not here to jump on the band wagon of "speed limits are BS."

There's a safe happy medium out there, emphasis on SAFE.

[Suf Daddy]

W I N N A H !
-Suf Daddy

[Eloi]

I'm definately not here to shake the "slow down" finger at anyone, but I'm also not here to jump on the band wagon of "speed limits are BS."

And I agree , I think I drive fast on highways but I realise some drive realllly too fast ..for the conditions , like when I drive to the Big Apple @
6.00 am and see cars flying 85/90 mph ....following inches ...

I think the ''thinkers'' should come up with some serious solution , like changing the wording , I am allergic to ''slow down'' , why not '' adjust your speed '' sounds less frustating when you have 250 hp under the foot.

A Canadian study showed that speed acts like a drug on the brain , creating euphoria , the same chemical phenomenon as some drugs ...
So the really ''speed intoxicated'' @repetition could be submitted to GPS controlled .

More than on speed I would emphasis on the rate of acceleration , many accidents happend under 40 mph but at a high rate of G....

Safety is a science but becomes too often a racket in the hands of politicians pulling laws from nowhere.

At last , repression has its limits but education is limitless . :wink:

[austinado16]

Yep, you see the same thing here in southern California. Traffic can be blasting along perfectly fine at 75+ in a 55 or 65......and that's great. Everybody's flowing nicely and gettin' along. And the next thing you know, somebody comes blasting by.

So you're back to speed, but more like careless speed, or the buzz phrase, safe speed. And there's that grey area........what's safe?

It's never going to be a perfect "system" or a "safe" system, and all we can hope to do is our best. Our best traffic surveys, our best driving, our best speed enforcement, and our best in the courtroom.