Kid cited for texting and wireless device

[ktm_guy]

My 17yo son, Jesse the Terror, was cited by the CHP in Sonora for 1) texting and 2) under 18 using a wireless device while driving.

He was in fact not texting. The iPhone was hard wired into the MP3 port on the radio and being used as an iPod music player. So the device was not being used in a wireless mode. Stopped at a light he picked up the device and changed songs and was seen by the CHP.

Guilty or innocent? Why?

We have been reading both laws and some on line stuff as to what has worked to get these infractions dismissed. We plan to "trial by declaration".

Anyone here won/lost such case?

 

[theAmazingKickstand]

In Redwood City the bailiff tells everyone up front that under no circumstance will any of us be found innocent if we had the phone in hand. Do not waste the judges time with "music" or "directions."

 

[davidmc]

I have heard the same thing, if the phone is in the hand it is a ticket....

 

[theAmazingKickstand]

Get the detailed bill from your phone company. If there are no texts within 20 mns of the ticket then you could have an argument. Google the whole process though cuz very few succeed. It's not considered proof or reliable or something.

 

[davidmc]

Get the detailed bill from your phone company. If there are no texts within 20 mns of the ticket then you could have an argument. Google the whole process though cuz very few succeed. It's not considered proof or reliable or something.

Maybe that would get the texting charge dropped, but he would probably still get nailed for using the phone while driving (phone in hand).

Sorry to be blunt, but if he wasn't paying enough attention to notice a CHP pulling up next to him as he was using the phone, he probably deserves the ticket. It is probably a good lesson learned for your son.

 

[nbean16]

Were you there? Or did he just tell you he wasn't texting? I don't know if its worth fighting or not, but every LEO seems to interpret this law differently, so it may just depend on the judge.

 

[ktm_guy]

Get the detailed bill from your phone company. If there are no texts within 20 mns of the ticket then you could have an argument. Google the whole process though cuz very few succeed. It's not considered proof or reliable or something.

Seems kind of British to me, Guilty until proven innocent. Isn't the burden of proof on the cop? Just having the phone in hand seems to be enough.

I have since purchased a phone mount to set on the dash or stick to the windshield. RAM makes a nice one that is a spring loaded X bar like clamp. It fits many phones securely with or without a protective case on them. The RAM holder was $25 at GPS City on line not included a base just the gripper

Maybe that would get the texting charge dropped, but he would probably still get nailed for using the phone while driving (phone in hand).

Thing is if I can get the primary offense dropped the secondary has to go too.

Were you there? Or did he just tell you he wasn't texting? I don't know if its worth fighting or not, but every LEO seems to interpret this law differently, so it may just depend on the judge.

I wasn't there. And yes teenager's freaking lie. I did ask why he didn't show his phone to the cop right then and there along with showing the cop the MP3 wire. He said the cop was irate and he just shut up.

5 min prior to be stopped he was in a parking lot parked and did send a text. Timing may be too close to have a fighting chance.

Anyone ever get AT&T to send them a text record on their phone?

 

[SuperMike]

Burn him!!! He could have killed someone!! Kids today have no respect!!!

But seriously, bummer. Sounds like he was using his device sensibly. It's too bad we, as a society, have to legislate everything to the lowest common denominator.

 

[ktm_guy]

Burn him!!! He could have killed someone!! Kids today have no respect!!!

But seriously, bummer. Sounds like he was using his device sensibly. It's too bad we, as a society, have to legislate everything to the lowest common denominator.

Welcome to Californication, been here for over 50yrs and it's so deep no one can get any air.

I appreciate the intent of the law. Driving distracted has cost many lives but I really don't think he's guilty, this time. But I fear that there's no reasonable way to defend such a case, guilty or not, cause the cop says so. Just $300 more tax arty

 

[theAmazingKickstand]

Maybe that would get the texting charge dropped, but he would probably still get nailed for using the phone while driving (phone in hand).

.

Someone correct me but I think it is indeed legal to drive while getting directions or looking for music on your phone.

Isn't the burden of proof on the cop?

No not for traffic violation. There's a special provision that effectively says you're guilty until proven innocent. If you wanna go the bill record route really research how to to do successfully. They don't allow it as evidence or proof for the similar reasons they don't allow camera footage. Lotsa folks storm out of court all pissed with WTF arms flying and yelling at anyone who'd listen.
(I'm not a cop or a lawyer)

Was your kid driving dangerously? Personally that's my ONLY concern. You won't find too many with my mindset though. I've got another opinion of popping someone for checking their phone at a light but I'll leave it to myself.

 

[5MARY6]

HANDS FREE LAW; Drop the telephone and stay alert. The fact is he was not using the telephone in the manner allowed by law. Of course he was not texting dad! And no, it is not legal to look up directions, gps, search facebook or whatever reason you may be on your telephone. The law reads pretty basic.

 

[pizzle]

Looks like it's time to get a separate MP3 player and GPS.

 

[mototireguy]

the phone in hand.

This is basically it.

Near zero difference that it wasn't a call. Distraction in hand.

All hope of an acquittal is not lost. You could attempt the "but I was stopped at a red light" defense.

The legit way for drivers to use these devices is to mount them, use the speaker phone, enjoy the navigation apps, surf the web, watch pron driving to work, easy peasy.

Maybe one of our accomplished photochop operators can cut-n-paste some tasteful pron onto the phone screen in the photo below for giggles.

 

[ToraTora]

Present the Truth in the best possible light

.

 

[ktm_guy]

HANDS FREE LAW; Drop the telephone and stay alert. The fact is he was not using the telephone in the manner allowed by law. Of course he was not texting dad! And no, it is not legal to look up directions, gps, search facebook or whatever reason you may be on your telephone. The law reads pretty basic.

So you mean if you are not hands free, is that correct? What about if the device is held in the holder shown above. Can you use it as a GPS, music player or whatever while driving? I am not saying it's a good idea but just asking what's legal.

Of course he was not texting dad! If you read I above, I already stated teenagers are profound liars. But how can a cop determine if he was texting? Seems to me the law is out of date with today's technology and does not address the case where one is using the device for other than phone or text. Don't we go by the letter of the law?

Don't get me wrong distracted driving is a huge issue. So put down that donut and answer my question

 

[Slow600rr]

In summary 23124cvc says a driver under the age of 18 may not use a mobile service device while driving. It doesn't specify anything in particular, chalk it up as a lesson learned. At least it's not a moving violation.

Oh and 23124(g) defines a mobile service device as a broadband personal communication device, SPECIALIZED MOBILE RADIO DEVICE, handheld device or laptop computer with mobile data access, pager, 2-way messaging device.

 

[dtrides]

Not ok to change the song on your MP3, but I see this all the time. And usually a cig or coffee in the other hand..

 

[CABilly]

I'd go with the dialing exemption defense

But that he is under 18, it may be a moot point

 

[walty87]

where at on 108 did this happen? just curios? I commute to sonora (to att actually lol I work there) form oakdale everyday

 

[nbean16]

Like I said, I've heard several LEOs interpret the this law differently, even on threads here they've disagreed. However, the under 18 citation seems pretty clear. I doubt you will win this, id just chalk it up to being a lesson for your son not mess with the phone while driving whether he was doing something dangerous or not. Give him sme extra chores to pay it off, everybody wins.