What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? California
hi,
i have read some related threads on this issue but still have some questions.
i was cited in San Francisco for Failure to Yield Pedestrian Right of Way in an Intersection.
The officer told me it was part of a "sting" that they set up from time to time.
I was on a motorcycle traveling Northbound on Sansome street. the cross-street was Green. It is a one-way road with 4 total lanes. the outside 2 lanes are parking and the inside 2 lanes are for vehicle travel.
i was riding a motorcycle.
i never saw a pedestrian at all, so it hard for me to speak to where the plainclothes officer was. some more info:
1. when the officer pulled me over, he first said that the pedestrian had taken 1-2 steps into the intersection. about 60 seconds later he said the pedestrian had taken 3-4 steps into the intersection. when i challenged him on this discrepancy he said it could have been 3-5 steps. when i again challenged him, he said that it does not matter if the person had taken 1 step or 5 steps. he also said "you might have been going a little fast" with no basis for this comment.
2. due to the slight changing of his evidence, i asked him how far he was behind me (he was also on a motorcycle) when he saw this infraction take place. He told me he he was on a side street (this is when he mentioned it was a "sting").
3. after the citation i went to my office where i have a perfect, 7th floor view of the intersection and where the officers wait for drivers to commit these infractions. i took some photos and a video of the "pedestrian" as he attempted several more crossing of the intersection.
my questions/issues:
a. from where the officer is located in relation to the intersection, i don't think he can tell how far i was from the pedestrian when the pedestrian entered the intersection. he does not have the angle to be able to make that determination. he is tucked away about 4 cars from the intersection so he can only see me as i enter the intersection, which puts me about 30 feet from the crosswalk. no way he can scan this scene and determine where i was when the pedestrian starts crossing. Does this hold any water?
b. i am on a motorcycle, which allows for a lot more free space for the pedestrian to advance without me hindering his progress. i read in People v Hahn: "not infrequently a pedestrian, lawfully in the crosswalk because he entered it while the signal indicated "Go" (see People v. Hawkins (1942), 51 Cal. App. 2d Supp. 779 [124 P.2d 691]), is but a relatively short distance from his point of entrance, and so far distant from the waiting motor vehicle that the latter can proceed to make use of that portion of the highway lying within the crosswalk without interfering with the right of the pedestrian to use it when he reaches it. The duty placed upon the driver is not so expressed that he is required to wait until the crosswalk is clear; his duty is to wait only if necessary to avoid interference with the pedestrian." Again, any validity to this argument.
c. As i continued to watch the "pedestrian" i noticed that he does 2 things. 1) intentionally starts crossing the intersection at a point when the incoming car has to make a very quick decision to stop or proceed, and 2) as he crosses the road he doesn't even stay in the crosswalk. (i have a picture of him walking a few feet outside of the crosswalk). thoughts on the validity of any of this info
d. Is my best option to submit my dispute in writing or request a trial? i do want to get rid of the point; i care more about that than the fine. anyone know if i lose in court can i still do traffic school? i have no infractions in the past ~12 years so no issues there.
many thanks for any assistance,
jon
hi,
i have read some related threads on this issue but still have some questions.
i was cited in San Francisco for Failure to Yield Pedestrian Right of Way in an Intersection.
The officer told me it was part of a "sting" that they set up from time to time.
I was on a motorcycle traveling Northbound on Sansome street. the cross-street was Green. It is a one-way road with 4 total lanes. the outside 2 lanes are parking and the inside 2 lanes are for vehicle travel.
i was riding a motorcycle.
i never saw a pedestrian at all, so it hard for me to speak to where the plainclothes officer was. some more info:
1. when the officer pulled me over, he first said that the pedestrian had taken 1-2 steps into the intersection. about 60 seconds later he said the pedestrian had taken 3-4 steps into the intersection. when i challenged him on this discrepancy he said it could have been 3-5 steps. when i again challenged him, he said that it does not matter if the person had taken 1 step or 5 steps. he also said "you might have been going a little fast" with no basis for this comment.
2. due to the slight changing of his evidence, i asked him how far he was behind me (he was also on a motorcycle) when he saw this infraction take place. He told me he he was on a side street (this is when he mentioned it was a "sting").
3. after the citation i went to my office where i have a perfect, 7th floor view of the intersection and where the officers wait for drivers to commit these infractions. i took some photos and a video of the "pedestrian" as he attempted several more crossing of the intersection.
my questions/issues:
a. from where the officer is located in relation to the intersection, i don't think he can tell how far i was from the pedestrian when the pedestrian entered the intersection. he does not have the angle to be able to make that determination. he is tucked away about 4 cars from the intersection so he can only see me as i enter the intersection, which puts me about 30 feet from the crosswalk. no way he can scan this scene and determine where i was when the pedestrian starts crossing. Does this hold any water?
b. i am on a motorcycle, which allows for a lot more free space for the pedestrian to advance without me hindering his progress. i read in People v Hahn: "not infrequently a pedestrian, lawfully in the crosswalk because he entered it while the signal indicated "Go" (see People v. Hawkins (1942), 51 Cal. App. 2d Supp. 779 [124 P.2d 691]), is but a relatively short distance from his point of entrance, and so far distant from the waiting motor vehicle that the latter can proceed to make use of that portion of the highway lying within the crosswalk without interfering with the right of the pedestrian to use it when he reaches it. The duty placed upon the driver is not so expressed that he is required to wait until the crosswalk is clear; his duty is to wait only if necessary to avoid interference with the pedestrian." Again, any validity to this argument.
c. As i continued to watch the "pedestrian" i noticed that he does 2 things. 1) intentionally starts crossing the intersection at a point when the incoming car has to make a very quick decision to stop or proceed, and 2) as he crosses the road he doesn't even stay in the crosswalk. (i have a picture of him walking a few feet outside of the crosswalk). thoughts on the validity of any of this info
d. Is my best option to submit my dispute in writing or request a trial? i do want to get rid of the point; i care more about that than the fine. anyone know if i lose in court can i still do traffic school? i have no infractions in the past ~12 years so no issues there.
many thanks for any assistance,
jon
