CVC 22350 Unsafe Speed vs Excessive Speed

[dling1234]

I live in California. I received a citation on 12/02/2014 for violating CVC 22350 Unsafe Speed, lost TBWD and now set trial DE NOVO in mid August. Below are questions.

1. I was cited for CVC 22350 Unsafe Speed but my TBWD found me guilty in CVC 22350 Excessive Speed. Can I argue that CVC 22350 made no reference about Excessive Speed limits alone which is “absolute” speed limits. The citation should be dismissed. If the prosecution is not clear about exact charges, my case should be dismissed.

If the judge denies my motion, then I would have to fight harder and I received a copy of the officer’s decoration:

2. I made a mistake by stating “I wasn’t sure how fast I was driving, must be too fast”. I am not sure if my stupid big mouth would bite me later although I would argue that driving too fast alone would not make my speed unsafe without considering other conditions in CVC 22350, I Have prepared documents addressing elements in the code. I did mention that “traffic is light”, an element should be considered in CVC 22350.

3. The officer stated that the speed measuring device was last calibrated on 4/25/3015, which was a date almost five months after the date when I was cited. Evidently, when I was cited for the violation, this future evidence did not exist. Therefore, there was no evidence that the measuring device was calibrated timely. All evidences of the radar device produced should be excluded.

4. Officer stated that he first assumed me speeding was at 1620 hours and he noted the same time on the citation. Shouldn’t there be time difference on record between the start and stop? If this is allowable by the judge, can I argue that I need the information which would be critical for my defense because if I knew the exact time when the radar clocked me and when the officer made the stop then I’d be able to quickly calculate how much time would be needed to make the entire 1,700’, ( per Google map) trip, under the alleged speed.

5. If the readout on the radar is absolute and correct why would its data written on the citation referred as “approximate”? Therefore, the officer really did not know how fast I was driving, so the case should be dismissed.

Thank you for the advice.

 

[HighwayMan]

4. Officer stated that he first assumed me speeding was at 1620 hours and he noted the same time on the citation. Shouldn’t there be time difference on record between the start and stop?

Times are always "on or about". I've stopped people and written them ten minutes later and used the time of writing the ticket as the time of the offense. A five or ten minute difference is meaningless.

5. If the readout on the radar is absolute and correct why would its data written on the citation referred as “approximate”? Therefore, the officer really did not know how fast I was driving, so the case should be dismissed.

Nothing is perfect and totally accurate. If I remember correctly, I was taught that the radar we used is accurate +/- 1 mph.

 

[davew128]

I assume you're trying to beat the case on the law rather than the facts? That's great but you still need facts to back your case...you don't have any.

 

[CdwJava]

The time issue is a non-starter, and there is really no way to provide the EXACT time of the radar reading and visual estimations compared to the stop. In fact, it is very likely that any clock in the patrol car will differ from the dispatch computer clock and even the officer's wrist watch. All times are approximate.

I suspect the calibration issue is also a non-starter. Unless you were cited for 26 in a 25, I doubt that the calibration will be an issue here.

Keep in mind that if the officer is radar trained, he has also been trained and certified in the visual estimation of speed. If you exceeded the posted speed limit and there exists a valid survey that supports that posted speed limit, the burden then shifts to you to show that the speed you traveled was NOT "unsafe" given the conditions that were present in the area at the time. If the speed survey is not valid, then you should be able to prevail with some ease. If it IS valid, then you may also want to consider pleading guilty or "no contest" in order to take traffic school and avoid a point on your license and increased insurance fees. Most courts will not allow traffic school if you go to trial and lose. They CAN, and they MIGHT, but they are under no obligation to do so or explain why they did not ... in my experience and given my conversations with other officers throughout the state, standard practice is to deny TS if you lose at trial.