My question involves traffic court in the State of: California.
In April 2014, I was cited for an infraction of CVC 22350 for going 39 mph in a 25 mph zone, when the visibility was clear, traffic was light, and weather was dry. The officer used LIDAR to record my speed. I have gotten the traffic survey for the area in question (dated August 2008) and the street is designated as a Minor Arterial road under CalTrans Road System Maps. The 85% percentile speed is 31 mph, but the survey indicates the speed limit was lowered further from the closest 5mph due to :
Numerous driveways and side streets. High pedestrian and bike activity. Collision rate higher than expected (2 in an 18 month period).
However, that would make 71% of the drivers (as shown in the survey) violators of the limit. This posted limit makes violators of "a disproportionate number of the reasonable majority of drivers,", hence an illegal speed trap according to the Traffic Manual.
Anyway I went to court on Sep 11 and found out my case was being heard by the infamous Commissioner JP Madden. Luckily, the officer didn't show up on but requested a continuance for the next week, which was granted with a new trial date of Sep 19. I decided to file a motion to dismiss citing the "disproportionate number of the reasonable majority of drivers" speed trap argument above, so that even if Madden rules against me, I plan to appeal so that the written motion can be reviewed by the appeals panel. I then requested a continuance of my own to give the court time to receive the motion (which it has). The new trial date is now Oct 23rd (and I found out the officer did show up to the Sep 19 trial, so he's likely to show for the new date). I was reading the forums and I discovered one can file a peremptory challenge to remove Madden from the case. Is this doable given the two continuances, and is it worth doing?
In April 2014, I was cited for an infraction of CVC 22350 for going 39 mph in a 25 mph zone, when the visibility was clear, traffic was light, and weather was dry. The officer used LIDAR to record my speed. I have gotten the traffic survey for the area in question (dated August 2008) and the street is designated as a Minor Arterial road under CalTrans Road System Maps. The 85% percentile speed is 31 mph, but the survey indicates the speed limit was lowered further from the closest 5mph due to :
Numerous driveways and side streets. High pedestrian and bike activity. Collision rate higher than expected (2 in an 18 month period).
However, that would make 71% of the drivers (as shown in the survey) violators of the limit. This posted limit makes violators of "a disproportionate number of the reasonable majority of drivers,", hence an illegal speed trap according to the Traffic Manual.
Anyway I went to court on Sep 11 and found out my case was being heard by the infamous Commissioner JP Madden. Luckily, the officer didn't show up on but requested a continuance for the next week, which was granted with a new trial date of Sep 19. I decided to file a motion to dismiss citing the "disproportionate number of the reasonable majority of drivers" speed trap argument above, so that even if Madden rules against me, I plan to appeal so that the written motion can be reviewed by the appeals panel. I then requested a continuance of my own to give the court time to receive the motion (which it has). The new trial date is now Oct 23rd (and I found out the officer did show up to the Sep 19 trial, so he's likely to show for the new date). I was reading the forums and I discovered one can file a peremptory challenge to remove Madden from the case. Is this doable given the two continuances, and is it worth doing?
Hearings and Trials: 22350 CVC Violation - Madden
0 commentaires:
Enregistrer un commentaire