cvc 22348b....approximate speed 110....help?

[BamR6]

Back on 10/18/07 I was on Hwy 4 east bound before the pittsburg bart station cruising w/ traffic at no more that 80 mph. I saw a CHP on the inside of the freway and throttled off to about 65-70 mph. As I came up to the officer it appeared to me he was not even using his radar and I proceeded past. After I passed I had looked in my mirror numerous times and he never turned his lights on or pulled onto the fwy. I continued on my way after he was fully out of sight. I went approximately 1 mile down the fwy and saw a different CHP on a motorcycle on the side of the road. My speed was 65-70 mph. He spotted me and pulled out, cut across alll lanes of traffic, turned on his lights and pointed to the side of the fwy. I proceeded to pull over. As I pulled over the CHP in the car pulls up from behind. He takes my key and I give him my liscence and registration. He tells me he had me on radar at 90mph and was ticketing me for 110, claiming that after I passed him he had to do 120 mph to catch up to me! (recall he sat in his car for at least 15 or more seconds untill he was out of my sight.) I asked him to see the radar for proof of 90 and he stated he did not have it, but it didnt matter because he was ticketing me for 110, and his speedometer is calibrated and not to fight my ticket because he would take that to court.
My questions:

1: What are the laws on pacing? He was nowhere around me and still gave me the ticket

2: Should he have shown me the radar when I asked?

3: If He had me on radar at 90, why is he ticketing me for 110?

4: The officer that pulled me over is different from the one that wrote the ticket, do they both have to show up to court?

5: Do I stand a chance in fighting it?

ps. I was polite, and I did not argue with the officer.


Any help on this matter would be greatly appriciated.

[Melzerp]

Wait.. what? The cop that pulled you over wasn't the one that gave you at ticket? And why would him going 120 count as him pacing your speed of "110?" Of course he would be going faster to catch up tp you... And if you were going 110, wouldnt the cop that pulled you over cite you with that?

Maybe I'm not understanding something. <confused.>

[Bronto]

Math problem Vehicle A passes stopped Vehicle B at 80 mph. Fifteen seconds later Vehicle B pulls into traffic taking 18 seconds to get to 120 mph in a 1/3 rd or a mile. How many miles does it take for Vehicle B to reach Vehicle A.
First how far has vehicles traveled when vehicle B reached 120 mph.
Vehicle A traveled (80/60 x 15/60) + (80/60 x 18/60) miles = roughly 3/4 mile
Vehicle B traveled 1/3 rd mile
Difference is 40 mph between Vehicle A and B at a distance of .42 miles.
The time it takes to travel .42 mile at 40 mph (.42/40 x 3600) = 38 seconds
In 38 seconds at 80 mph traveled (38/60 x 80/60) miles - .84 miles
Total distance for vehicle B at 80 mph traveled .84 + .42 + .75 miles roughly 2 miles.

Total distance for Vehicle A at 110 mph
1.0 mile difference at Veh B @ 120 + 12 miles to make up the difference of 10 mph + 11 miles travel in the 6 minutes it took to catch up. Total of 13 miles and 6 1/2 minutes to get pulled over.

Heh sure theres allot of rounding off, even mistakes. But it does show there's differences between catching up to a 110 mph and a 80 mph vehicle. One is stopped in Pittsburg, the other in Antioch

[BamR6]

Math problem Vehicle A passes stopped Vehicle B at 80 mph. Fifteen seconds later Vehicle B pulls into traffic taking 18 seconds to get to 120 mph in a 1/3 rd or a mile. How many miles does it take for Vehicle B to reach Vehicle A.
First how far has vehicles traveled when vehicle B reached 120 mph.
Vehicle A traveled (80/60 x 15/60) + (80/60 x 18/60) miles = roughly 3/4 mile
Vehicle B traveled 1/3 rd mile
Difference is 40 mph between Vehicle A and B at a distance of .42 miles.
The time it takes to travel .42 mile at 40 mph (.42/40 x 3600) = 38 seconds
In 38 seconds at 80 mph traveled (38/60 x 80/60) miles - .84 miles
Total distance for vehicle B at 80 mph traveled .84 + .42 + .75 miles roughly 2 miles.

Total distance for Vehicle A at 110 mph
1.0 mile difference at Veh B @ 120 + 12 miles to make up the difference of 10 mph + 11 miles travel in the 6 minutes it took to catch up. Total of 13 miles and 6 1/2 minutes to get pulled over.

Heh sure theres allot of rounding off, even mistakes. But it does show there's differences between catching up to a 110 mph and a 80 mph vehicle. One is stopped in Pittsburg, the other in Antioch


wait...is this in favor of me or prove me wrong?

can i use this in court?

[hitman5532]

Math problem Vehicle A passes stopped Vehicle B at 80 mph. Fifteen seconds later Vehicle B pulls into traffic taking 18 seconds to get to 120 mph in a 1/3 rd or a mile. How many miles does it take for Vehicle B to reach Vehicle A.
First how far has vehicles traveled when vehicle B reached 120 mph.
Vehicle A traveled (80/60 x 15/60) + (80/60 x 18/60) miles = roughly 3/4 mile
Vehicle B traveled 1/3 rd mile
Difference is 40 mph between Vehicle A and B at a distance of .42 miles.
The time it takes to travel .42 mile at 40 mph (.42/40 x 3600) = 38 seconds
In 38 seconds at 80 mph traveled (38/60 x 80/60) miles - .84 miles
Total distance for vehicle B at 80 mph traveled .84 + .42 + .75 miles roughly 2 miles.

Total distance for Vehicle A at 110 mph
1.0 mile difference at Veh B @ 120 + 12 miles to make up the difference of 10 mph + 11 miles travel in the 6 minutes it took to catch up. Total of 13 miles and 6 1/2 minutes to get pulled over.

Heh sure theres allot of rounding off, even mistakes. But it does show there's differences between catching up to a 110 mph and a 80 mph vehicle. One is stopped in Pittsburg, the other in Antioch

to my recolection, that qualifies as an illegal speed trap

[BamR6]

YAY!! Hopefully the judge will feel the same way!

[Junkie]

Math problem Vehicle A passes stopped Vehicle B at 80 mph. Fifteen seconds later Vehicle B pulls into traffic taking 18 seconds to get to 120 mph in a 1/3 rd or a mile. How many miles does it take for Vehicle B to reach Vehicle A.
First how far has vehicles traveled when vehicle B reached 120 mph.
Vehicle A traveled (80/60 x 15/60) + (80/60 x 18/60) miles = roughly 3/4 mile
Vehicle B traveled 1/3 rd mile
Difference is 40 mph between Vehicle A and B at a distance of .42 miles.
The time it takes to travel .42 mile at 40 mph (.42/40 x 3600) = 38 seconds
In 38 seconds at 80 mph traveled (38/60 x 80/60) miles - .84 miles
Total distance for vehicle B at 80 mph traveled .84 + .42 + .75 miles roughly 2 miles.

Total distance for Vehicle A at 110 mph
1.0 mile difference at Veh B @ 120 + 12 miles to make up the difference of 10 mph + 11 miles travel in the 6 minutes it took to catch up. Total of 13 miles and 6 1/2 minutes to get pulled over.

Heh sure theres allot of rounding off, even mistakes. But it does show there's differences between catching up to a 110 mph and a 80 mph vehicle. One is stopped in Pittsburg, the other in Antiochfirst, a CVPI won't hit 120 in 18 seconds and 1/3 of a mile. at all.


second, yeah, too much discrepancy in the math.





if a cop really wants to fuck you over, he can. it's pretty much his word against yours as far as giving you the ticket, and guess who the judge is going to go with. offer to plead guilty to 80 (or however fast you were going), because you understand you were exceeding the speed limit, however it was by nowhere near as much as he is claiming.

oh, and go calibrate your speedometer with a GPS so you can see if you were actually doing 80 or if you have a freak case where your speedometer reads low.

[Rel]

First of all, look up the legal defination of a speed trap.

Second, is the ticket a radar ticket or pacing?

[BamR6]

it was a pacing ticket, my main thing is was his pacing legal at that distance? and do both chp have to show up to court?

[hitman5532]

First of all, look up the legal defination of a speed trap.

Second, is the ticket a radar ticket or pacing?

i was refeing to bronto's method of calculating speed based on distance traveled over period of time

[sasquatch]

After I passed I had looked in my mirror numerous times and he never turned his lights on or pulled onto the fwy. I continued on my way after he was fully out of sight.
Ask the question, did the first officer have you in sight the whole time?
Could he have you confused with another motorcycle?
Here is a possible scenario:
You go past.
Some time later (10-15 seconds) he sees a different motorcycle going 90.
He goes to persue, looses sight of that motorcycle and radios ahead.
The other cop pulls you over.
The delay between your motorcycle and the 2nd one would give the impression that you were going much faster since you are further down the freeway.
There is another post about someone who was pulled over by a 2nd officer on one of the bridges, and one of the LEO mods did a great post on it.
See if you can find it. It asks questions like;
What other cars and trucks were on the freeway at the same time?
Did he check traffic in his mirrors or look over his shoulder before entering the freeway.
Did another motorcycle pass the LEO and then exit the freeway to escape?
What time was the radio call to the other unit?
What was the description of the vehicle that went out on the call to the other unit?
Did other traffic interfere with the LEO?
How heavy was traffic that day?

Math question time
If someone passes a LEO doing 90, while the LEO is stopped on the side of the road,
How far away will the bike be when the LEO leaves the shoulder?
How fast can the LEO's vehicle get from 0 to 60? 0 to 90? 0 to 120?
How far will a vehicle going 90mph travel in that same time? (0 - 90 in 20 seconds from the side of the freeway, 20 seconds at 90 mph about 3000 feet ahead).

[B-Cuz]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it is the ticket issuing officer that has to show up for court. The moto cop pulled you over based on the fact that he was in a better position and also had the capability to pull you over at that time, therefore his role in the citation is minor.

[Burning1]

I asked him to see the radar for proof of 90 and he stated he did not have it, but it didnt matter because he was ticketing me for 110, and his speedometer is calibrated and not to fight my ticket because he would take that to court.

In my experience, if an officer tells you not to fight a ticket, it means that you probably have a strong case.

As other posters have pointed out, if the officer was using the distance you covered as part of a speed calculation, his actions may be considered a speed trap as per CVC 40802.

http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d17/vc40802.htm

You can use the discovery process to acquire all of the facts the District attorney (DA) will use against you in this case. Since you were not going the speed the officer cited you for, there is a good chance that you can use the prosecutions evidence to prove your innocence.

In court, I would use the officer's comments against him:

- The officer did not pace you. He explicitly stated that he exceeded your speed in order to catch you.
- The officer's radar readings did not confirm the speed he claims you were going.

Unfortunately, I am not personally aware of any precedents that might help you.

You aren't going to win by arguing with the officers in front of a judge. The best defense is based on established traffic laws and indisputable evidence. When it comes down to your word against the officer, your only hope is to use his testimony against him.

It sounds like you may have a solid shot at beating this ticket. I would recommend you hire a good lawyer. The price of a lawyer for this type of violation is usually lower than the price of insurance, fines, and bus fare.

If you can prove that your speed was well below 110, I would suggest you make a contempt of court claim and take the issue up with the officer's supervisor.

To answer your specific questions:

1: What are the laws on pacing? He was nowhere around me and still gave me the ticket
Answer: I have tried to determine the specific laws, without any luck. Generally, the officer should follow you at your speed for 5 seconds, but my experience is not the law.

2: Should he have shown me the radar when I asked?
Answer: He is under no obligation to do so.

3: If He had me on radar at 90, why is he ticketing me for 110?
Answer: I wish I could answer this.

4: The officer that pulled me over is different from the one that wrote the ticket, do they both have to show up to court?
Answer: Yes, that is correct.

5: Do I stand a chance in fighting it?
Answer: I think you have a chance. Regardless, by fighting, you may get out of this because the officers fail to respond. Fighting will also delay the amount of time a conviction appears on your record.

[BamR6]

Thanks for all the help guys. I am trying to get all of the laws I need in order with section numbers and such. If anyone finds anything else out, please feel free to share. I am going in tomorrow to plead not guilty under faulty pacing etc. etc. etc. at 9am. I believe the next step is to set a different court date? If im wrong please explain the full process to me, so I am prepared.

Has anyone heard of speedticketbeaters.com? are they worth it?

[Razel]

Ticket Asassin (Nolo Press) has been mentioned many times before as a good resource.
Since you're still getting your ducks lined up, you may want to consider an extension prior to submitting your plea. Just don't piss off the judge...

[Burning1]

Ticket Asassin (Nolo Press) has been mentioned many times before as a good resource.
Since you're still getting your ducks lined up, you may want to consider an extension prior to submitting your plea. Just don't piss off the judge...

Remember that an extension waives your right to a speedy trial. If you maintain this right, you can have the case thrown out if the DA or court takes too long to prosecute.

On the other hand, an extension will provide more time to prepare, and will sometimes encourage the officers not to show up.

[Var]

sucks for you man. another bike probably ditched them and they're too angry to believe it wasn't you. (a good reason to have required video evidence )

please update us after the court date.

[BamR6]

the date on the ticket that I signed to appear in court for is the 12. I thought it was just to plea innocent or guilty and why. isnt there supposed to be a new date set that I tell my story and the cop tells his? correct me if I am mistaken.

[Razel]

The 12th? As in Dec. 12th?

Rhut rho...

You go to enter a plea. If you plead guilty, no need for the cop to show up. If you plead not guilty, and you don't waive time, I believe you get a date for all to show up and you defend yourself if the cop shows up. I have no idea what kind of timeframe you have if you don't waive time.

As mentioned, if you ask for an extension, you give up your right to a speedy trial.

As for the 12th, you may have not reset your watch calendar at the beginning of December...my watch says it's the 11th, but everything else says it's the 12th...and I'm betting the court is now closed.

[BamR6]

oops meant the 13th

[-Baker-]

keep us posted on the out come....

btw Dayum CHP cops!!!! You should have RAN!!! j/k thats for Rel ... haha.

[Burning1]

Note: You don't have to wait for the date on your ticket to go to arraignment. Show up to the court any day before that, and you'll be fine.

If you intend to fight this yourself, show up at your arraignment, plead not guilty, and request a trial by written declaration.

The officers must submit a response to the trial by written declaration. If they fail to, you get off. If they do submit a response, you can request a Trial De Novo (new trial, as if you hadn't done the written declaration,) and then pull the officers response to your declaration which may be usable as evidence in your defense.

Again, I highly recommend a lawyer for this case. I know it's expensive, but the cost of a conviction is much higher.

Let us know how it goes. We'll be here to help as things progress.

[-Baker-]

Note: You don't have to wait for the date on your ticket to go to arraignment. Show up to the court any day before that, and you'll be fine.

If you intend to fight this yourself, show up at your arraignment, plead not guilty, and request a trial by written declaration.

The officers must submit a response to the trial by written declaration. If they fail to, you get off. If they do submit a response, you can request a Trial De Novo (new trial, as if you hadn't done the written declaration,) and then pull the officers response to your declaration which may be usable as evidence in your defense.

Again, I highly recommend a lawyer for this case. I know it's expensive, but the cost of a conviction is much higher.

Let us know how it goes. We'll be here to help as things progress.

+1 on his response and a good one for that too.

[Bronto]

The math stuff is just more evidence that may help your cause. It might take the form of a diagram at different stages and the calculations that goes with it. Then a simplified verbal overview using your estimate and LEO' estimate of speed. Let the Judge decide for himself, hopefully it obvious. They like to find out little idiosyncrasies.
One idiosyncrasy is passing a Parked LEO that doesn't light up. Seems there's some importance in being stopped you get the full nine yards.
The script during the stop is right. Radar at 90 mph, LEO had to do 120 mph to catch up. Meaning you were doing 110 mph. Implies you were on the run. If you weren't the Math stuff can help show it nicely. Big distance difference between 120 and 75 mph.
It takes laws to fight laws in court, its why the lawyer. They'll BS it down to a speeding ticket of over 65 and under 100. A one pointer with traffic school.
It's too bad it takes lawyers, this one has allot of idiosyncrasies.

[Noid]

http://www.sacinjury.com/DismissedCases.shtml

[Slow600rr]

Well here's my .02...

By your own admission, you were going "no more than 80 mph." That would still be a violation of 22349(a) CVC - Exceeding 65mph.

Based on your statement, and the law.. I'd suggest you go before the judge, explain it the way you have here. Tell him you are not guilty of the charges on the citation, and plea it down to a violation of the code I listed. Fine will be much less. Again you were in violation by your own admission and if your lucky, you will be eligible for traffic school.

Oh, and maybe you will get lucky and one or both wont show up to court that day. ;)

[BillSmith]

http://www.helpigotaticket.com/index.html

Step-by-step walk through.

[Rel]

keep us posted on the out come....

btw Dayum CHP cops!!!! You should have RAN!!! j/k thats for Rel ... haha.

Baker!! Why don't pull your head out of your......

Oh WAIT!!!!!!!!!!!! That was a joke, I get it.

[-Baker-]

Baker!! Why don't pull your head out of your......

Oh WAIT!!!!!!!!!!!! That was a joke, I get it.


one day we'll meet.

Know Cooke? Used to be Hayward chiper.

[Warpkor]

My attorney for a speeding ticket of 124 mph cost me $1750. He appeared with me at the arraingment and the trial all for the flat fee of $1750. All I was concerned with was retaining my license. In my case, it turned out to be worth it even though I was convicted of a 22349(a) infraction for exceeding 65 mph as I got to retain my license. Check your employer for an Employee Assistance Program (EAP) for confidential discount legal help. Through my EAP, I saved 25% on attorneys fees.

[Rel]

one day we'll meet.

Know Cooke? Used to be Hayward chiper.

We'll meet at Alices!

Cooke...... nope.

[BamR6]

So, I went to my arrainment(sp) today. Never even went in front of a judge. I pleaded not guilty to a lady at a window and she schedualed me for a court date. Is this common? I was expecting to plead not guilty to a judge, not to a clerk in a window.

My trial is set for end of janurary, but im gonna have to change it after having been reminded by my lovely fiance that I will be in vegas that week. So, I've pulled together some stuff, spent some $$ and I think I have a pretty good chance of winning. Once it is all said and done I will post exactly what happened and how I won (assuming I will). Once again, thanks for everyones help, I'll keep you posted when things happen.

[silverbelt]

Whoa! :wow

Rel's going to Alices? Damn Rel, let us know when your going to be there.

[Warpkor]

That stikes me as strange. At my arraignment in Yuba County Courthouse, I went before a judge pro tem who was ready to suspend my license for 30 days after pleading "no contest." That's when my attorney changed the plea to "not guilty" and set a date for the trial Good luck with your trial.

[2strokeYardSale]

The arraignment is just an extra appointment they put in there to waste more of your time to try and get you to give up/pay up. Compared to various CA cities, Reno was a joke. They never informed anybody of the charges against us, they never asked us to enter pleas.

[Burning1]

So, I went to my arrainment(sp) today. Never even went in front of a judge. I pleaded not guilty to a lady at a window and she schedualed me for a court date. Is this common? I was expecting to plead not guilty to a judge, not to a clerk in a window.

That's normal. There are some situations where you may wish to go to arraignment in front of a judge, but if you plan to simply plead 'not guilty' and fight the ticket, the window is just as good.

[Rel]

Whoa! :wow

Rel's going to Alices? Damn Rel, let us know when your going to be there.

Didn't know I was so popular, or otherwise, as the case might be....

Sure. We can meet at Alices for a burger. Just say when!

[motorman4life]

Didn't know I was so popular, or otherwise, as the case might be....

Sure. We can meet at Alices for a burger. Just say when!

Hey.. count me in. :thumbup:thumbup
A bunch of you guys have promised me a beer over the past couple of years and I have yet to collect one. Maybe everyone that owes me a beer can chip in and get me an overpriced Ducati Burger at Alice's! :laughing

[-Baker-]

MM4L, Rel and Silver....lets do this ..Alices, Sat or Sun and what time?

[motorman4life]

I work this weekend and I'm going to be out of town next weekend... I can't ever seem to do last minute stuff nowadays. Everything is planned out weeks in advance!

[Rel]

I work this weekend and I'm going to be out of town next weekend... I can't ever seem to do last minute stuff nowadays. Everything is planned out weeks in advance!

How about a gathering at Alices the first weekend in Jan 2008 (Weather permitting)??

Bill it as: BARF into 2008.

Or:

Meet your fav BARF'er. Love em or leave em!

[afm199]

That sounds fun as long as we sit INSIDE. Whoaahhhh cold at Alices.

[motorman4life]

Okay, I'll start a new thread with an announcement.

Rain or wet roads will cancel. Runnoff is to be expected in the trees.

We'll shoot for January 5th with an alternate of January 6th. If that weekend is bad, we'll move it 2 weeks to Jan. 19 or 20.

Maybe we can make it an annual LEO Forum / New Year's Ride.. :thumbup

[-Baker-]

I'm in.....

How about a gathering at Alices the first weekend in Jan 2008 (Weather permitting)??

Bill it as: BARF into 2008.

Or:

Meet your fav BARF'er. Love em or leave em!

How about "BARF Meet-Greet, LEO style"

Us NON-LEO's will treat the LEO's for being apart of the community.

[afm199]

sounds good. You Leo's remember to eat hearty before the ride :twofinger

[Rel]

Well, then..... count me in!

[Bronto]

BamR6 should bring the ticket :laughing

Do riders have to be on best legal behavior on LEO rides. Was interesting Brash47 and Dragon - hmm how to put this - are hooligans. :laughing

[JPM]

sounds good. You Leo's remember to eat hearty before the ride :twofinger

Cheap bastid! :twofinger:laughing

[Rel]

Cheap bastid! :twofinger:laughing

:rofl