22349 Lidar 70 in a 55

[peetiewonder]

I got pulled over for a 22349 today on LIDAR "70 in a 55". The cop did not have any recording of the measurement, at least when I asked him if I could see it he said so. Also he told me I was traveling 10 mph faster than the two cars in front of me(he said i was doing 70 and they were doing 60, even though i was only 3-4 car lengths behind it. I am curious if there is anything I can do to fight this ticket. Also the ticket was on a back road with nothing but farm land around it, and I was not traveling at 70 mph. Additionally there was nothing unsafe about my speed, even if I would have been traveling 80 because its at least a mile long straight, probably more.

What do I need to do to fight this because this is definately a BS ticket. I think what really happenned was that he clocked the first car at 70 and then pulled me over for it since i was in the back and the easiest to pick off.

[Lucky225]

Originally Posted by peetiewonder

I got pulled over for a 22349 today on LIDAR "70 in a 55". The cop did not have any recording of the measurement, at least when I asked him if I could see it he said so. Also he told me I was traveling 10 mph faster than the two cars in front of me(he said i was doing 70 and they were doing 60, even though i was only 3-4 car lengths behind it. I am curious if there is anything I can do to fight this ticket. Also the ticket was on a back road with nothing but farm land around it, and I was not traveling at 70 mph. Additionally there was nothing unsafe about my speed, even if I would have been traveling 80 because its at least a mile long straight, probably more.

What do I need to do to fight this because this is definately a BS ticket. I think what really happenned was that he clocked the first car at 70 and then pulled me over for it since i was in the back and the easiest to pick off.

22349 -- what subsection?

[peetiewonder]

didnt put one on there.

[Lucky225]

Originally Posted by peetiewonder

didnt put one on there.

interesting,what kind of highway was it? Divided / Undivided? Lanes of traffic in each direction?

[peetiewonder]

one lane in each direction. undivided highway. No center lane.

[Lucky225]

Must be (b)

22349.
(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,
(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.


I'm guessing the only defense would be lidar isn't on judicial notice

[peetiewonder]

well so far what i know is that he clocked me at over 400 feet, by hand.
at that distance, the slightest movement of his hand (because he was a motorcycle cop using a handheld unit) can cause the beam to reflect off a different part of the car, such as the windshield, and cause the system to read that i indeed traveled 4-5 feet farther than i actually did over the given period of a second, which would cause my speed to register at 8-10 mph faster than i was actually going. This would put me around 60 mph, the same speed as the two cars in front of me, according to the officer, and i was traveling near the same speed as those two cars. Additionally, the lidar system did not register any reading and log it, so how am i to know that he didnt just make a number up to meet his quota.

[Lucky225]

Originally Posted by peetiewonder

well so far what i know is that he clocked me at over 400 feet, by hand.
at that distance, the slightest movement of his hand (because he was a motorcycle cop using a handheld unit) can cause the beam to reflect off a different part of the car, such as the windshield, and cause the system to read that i indeed traveled 4-5 feet farther than i actually did over the given period of a second, which would cause my speed to register at 8-10 mph faster than i was actually going. This would put me around 60 mph, the same speed as the two cars in front of me, according to the officer, and i was traveling near the same speed as those two cars. Additionally, the lidar system did not register any reading and log it, so how am i to know that he didnt just make a number up to meet his quota.

Unfortunately the officer's testimony it's self serves as evidence of what the machine recorded.

[peetiewonder]

so putting the officers word on trial isnt an option? or not a good choice?

what about using the math of the chances of, at that distance, what change in angle would be required to register a false reading on the gun?

at 400+ feet, if the radar moved 3/10ths of a degree, that is enough to raise or lower the beam two feet and cause it bounce off of my windshield rather than my liscence plate, yeilding a speed that is ~10mph faster than my actual velocity.

do you think that will hold up?, of course i will elaborate on it.

[peetiewonder]

i went back to the scene yesterday... some things that i noticed
1. there is no posted maximum or limit in the vicinity
2. the only posted maximum/ limit on the street in my direction of travel is a Limit, and not a maximum and is located about 2 miles away. All the surrounding streets are also posted with limits and not maximums.

will this help my case in saying that the ticket was bogus by arguing that no maximum was in effect according to the posted signage?