Legal question reguarding a ticket I got ?

[champagneG35]

Got a question... I got a ticket back in October and I'm trying to fight it cause I don't believe I was in the wrong or actually commited the infraction I'm being charged with. I read online that in California for some reason your chances of winning the case increase when you do a trial by delaration which means you fill out a form and submit it with a statement of facts and a judicial officer reviews it and makes a ruling off of it. The officer has to fill out more paperwork as well and also submit it by the given date. So that's what I'm doing. I'd just like some opinions on what you all think about this statement of facts. hopefully there's some lawyers on the board that might know if I need to rephrase anything.

So if you were a judge and saw this statement reguarding a ticket for "unsafe lane change or straddling - two or more lanes in direction of travel"what would you say guilty or not guilty ?

Anyway here is the statement of facts:Quote »On the morning of October 26, 2007 I was driving eastbound in the number 2 ("slow") lane of the 118 freeway. Traffic ahead of me started to slow down. There was an SUV directly in front of me off to the left side of his lane. With his rear window being too high for me to see through as suggested by California traffic schools so you are not just going off the vehicle in front of you and have a better idea of what is going on which allows you to make better judgement calls on which action to take should you need to. I was driving an Infinity G35 which is a low car by comparison to the SUV in front of me, since he was on the left side of his lane, I moved slightly to the right, towards the shoulder but not outside of my lane or "straddling" the shoulder line, to view the traffic situation ahead of the vehicle in front of me. I then moved back over to the center of my lane. The officer was about 200yards ahead parked on the right shoulder, saw my car move out to the right for a second and found it necessary to pull me over asking why I was driving in the shoulder. When I told him I was looking around the SUV ahead of me & I didn't have my tires over the line, his response was "well you sure scared the **** out of me". Which does not tell me anything other than the officer got scared and pulled me over because of it, it did not challenge my statement that my tires were not over the line. It is not illegal in California to change positions within your own lane. I was not weaving due to intoxication or to pass on the shoulder as my car would get torn up with all the debris over there if I were to try it. My action was simply to see traffic ahead and I accomplished this staying within the boundaries of my lane therefore I do not believe I deserve this infraction.

It is my belief that if I did something illegal or unsafe such as "driving in the shoulder" which would mean I was over the line then I'd accept the consequences and move on, as you are probably aware my past driving record has not been the best, made worse by an accident in 2004 that I was not in but is on my dmv record somehow. However I have been trying very hard to make sure I'm being safe to keep my record on it's way to getting better for insurance and personal reasons. Part of that is making sure I try my best not to get into any accidents, I believe my action to move over in my lane to see traffic ahead is a way to help accomplish that, not hinder it in an unsafe way. Come this May my insurance no longer will have anything they can increase my rates for because everything will be too old. If ruling is not in my favor then if it pleases the court I would at least like to be able to attend traffic school to keep this off my record.[/quote]Open to any suggestions. Perhaps I should take out the part about my past record and leave it requesting traffic school if found guilty ? Or can I even quote the officer if he cursed like he did ?? I know you are not supposed to curse in court but this is a written document that is read and not spoken so I'm not sure on it ?

[SVTCOBRA]

I'm not a lawyer, but I would take out anything about a past accident/ticket.I would also put it in word or something to check the syntax of the sentences. Don't have time right now to correct it. Infiniti ends in 'i' not 'y'.

Good luck!

[smockers83]

Needs some revision, some of the sentences are confusing. Also, you should say "on the shoulder" instead of "in the shoulder". Also, specify what "his" lane is whether it was your lane or the lane to your left, it's a little confusing.

[SVTCOBRA]

yes, a little confusing. Understood what you were saying, but took too long for me to stumble thru it. You want it to read quickly and clearly.

[champagneG35]

Ok guys, thanks for the replies. Also thanks for catching that infiniti mistake. I normaly spell that right. Anyway I tried to clean it up a bit and revise some things. I haven't installed office back on my computer yet since my last reformat so I don't have word just yet to through it into but I'll get on that. Let me know if you think it's better. I cut out a bunch as well.

Revised Version:Quote »On the morning of October 26, 2007 I was driving eastbound in the number 2 ("slow") lane of the 118 freeway. Traffic ahead of me started to slow down. There was an SUV directly in front of me on the left hand side of the number 2 lane and traffic in the number 1 lane preventing a lane change. California traffic schools suggest you look through the vehicle's window ahead of you to see traffic and have a better idea of what is going on in order to make better judgement calls on which action to take should you need to. I was driving an Infiniti G35 which is a low car by comparison to the SUV in front of me, the SUV's rear window was too high for me to see through. As stated above he was on the left side of the number 2 lane, I moved to the right side of the number 2 lane to view the traffic situation ahead of the SUV in front of me, I then moved back over to the center of my lane. I did not move outside of the lane or "straddle" the shoulder line. The officer was about 200yards ahead parked on the right shoulder. The officer saw my car move out to the right for a second and proceeded to pull me over and asked "Why were you driving in the shoulder?". I told him I was looking around the SUV ahead of me to see traffic and I didn't have my tires over the line, his response was "well you sure scared the **** out of me". That response did not tell me anything other than the officer got scared and pulled me over because of it, it did not challenge my statement that my tires were not over the line. It is not illegal in California to change positions within your own lane. I was not weaving due to intoxication or to pass on the shoulder. My action was made to simply to see traffic ahead and I accomplished this staying within the boundaries of my lane therefore I do not believe I deserve this infraction.

If ruling is not in my favor then if it pleases the court I would like to be able to attend traffic school to keep this off my record.[/quote]

[telcoman]

Ok guys, thanks for the replies. Also thanks for catching that infiniti mistake. I normaly spell that right. Anyway I tried to clean it up a bit and revise some things. I haven't installed office back on my computer yet since my last reformat so I don't have word just yet to through it into but I'll get on that. Let me know if you think it's better. I cut out a bunch as well.

Revised Version:

IMHO you need to get a lawyer. Do not try to represent yourself.Lawyers who have been in court hundreds of times know what to say and what not to say. They also know the judges. Did you read the post of one of our members for doing 124MPH in a 65?

Telcoman

[champagneG35]

Yeah I know Telcoman I read that one, I did that with one of my more serious tickets and got it dismissed but this is a $196 dollar simple infraction with no jail time which in my opinion doesn't warrant my lawyer who last time cost me $3K .

[Bobby23]

Well your case comes down to what the officer observed. If you take this to court, the officer will receive a subpoena for traffic court so he will know that you are contesting the ticket in court. Traffic court is mandatory for law enforcement officers, but it does not mean that the officer will show up. If the officer does not show up, you will win because he will not be there to testify to what he observed but if the officer does show up.....you probably wont win. The case will be based entirely on what the officer observed on the day of the infraction. If the officer states that he observed your tires over the line, its his word over yours and that’s not good for you. I would not take it to court because if you lose, you will have to pay for the court cost on top of whatever the ticket cost. If the officer is on any kind of traffic unit….you are screwed because they always show up for court and most of them have taken many classes on traffic law and are considered expert witness’ in court due to their high level of training. I have first hand experience on this topic and my opinion, don’t try and fight traffic tickets in court. Sorry to give you the bad news man.

[champagneG35]

Actually I was fighting it outside of court via paperwork. I also know first hand cops don't like more paperwork, I've had them let me off before because they didn't want to do the paperwork. My fine isn't going to go up in this case. It's an infraction with a set fee and I wont be in court. This is being handled through the mail. I got out of a parking ticket this way once not a traffic ticket yet but it's worth a try in my opinion. Thank you for your honesty though.

[joe603]

You should have said that you were avoiding an object in the road that you felt put you in danger...

It's a crapshoot with tickets like this...

[champagneG35]

You should have said that you were avoiding an object in the road that you felt put you in danger...

It's a crapshoot with tickets like this...

Yeah I also heard I should've said my check engine light came on so I went to pull over and then it went back out. A coworker said he got out of one that way before. The cop just said "what are you nuts?" then let him go. Hindsights always 20/20 as they say.

[C-Kwik]

Personally, I think if the statements you make are truthful, then you have a better chance of winning in court. It seems to me you're trying to simply stack odds in your favor of the officer not responding. But consider, if the officer does respond, you are going to have a judge decide your case without being able to make sure the judge understands your version and without an opportunity to cross-examine the officer. If you actually committed the violation and you were just trying to get out of it, it might be one thing, but if you have a valid case, it might be better to actually present it to the judge in person...

[W661335PF]

Great strategies and deceptive tactics for how to avoid paying or getting stuck in court, but not one for how to avoid getting tickets in the 1st place. Beyond this ticket, which seems to be taking its' toll, got any ideas on how you'll avoid tickets in the future. This, my friend, is the better question, especially if you have a history of getting moving violations (which you can't hide via omitting the info on your letter since you'll pop up on the computer within seconds).

I'd be curious to know how many G owners have gotten moving violations for speeding, reckless driving, reckless endangerment, etc. It seem we may develop a reputation as a class of drivers. In my sons 1989 Mercedes 190E, I drive more recklessly but get fewer tickets-- in my G, well, I'm new to this, but assume I'll have a harder time convincing a cop that my Alzheimers interrupted my reasoning and therefore as an old man, I can slip by.

Good luck and drive safely!

[Cali 2 Balti G]

Personally, I think if the statements you make are truthful, then you have a better chance of winning in court. It seems to me you're trying to simply stack odds in your favor of the officer not responding. But consider, if the officer does respond, you are going to have a judge decide your case without being able to make sure the judge understands your version and without an opportunity to cross-examine the officer. If you actually committed the violation and you were just trying to get out of it, it might be one thing, but if you have a valid case, it might be better to actually present it to the judge in person...

I agree - tell the truth.

I would even tell the truth about your driving record - this is info the judge has easy access to. Your arguement is that because of your record you are extra careful.

[gwoods]

Well your case comes down to what the officer observed. If you take this to court, the officer will receive a subpoena for traffic court so he will know that you are contesting the ticket in court. Traffic court is mandatory for law enforcement officers, but it does not mean that the officer will show up. If the officer does not show up, you will win because he will not be there to testify to what he observed

Bobby23 is telling you make sure the officer doesn't show up .... wait what?

[smockers83]

Lane positions should also be described as left-of-center, center and right-of-center.

My question is, how in the world did you think you'd be able to see around an SUV by only going right-of-center in the same lane as it? You would have to be playing pick a lane in order to see around the guy from your position in the car, no?

[champagneG35]

Lane positions should also be described as left-of-center, center and right-of-center.

My question is, how in the world did you think you'd be able to see around an SUV by only going right-of-center in the same lane as it? You would have to be playing pick a lane in order to see around the guy from your position in the car, no?

LOL...very good question ..ahh but from the passengers view ya can I leaned my body and head as far over as the seatbelt would let me so I didn't have to go over as far as you'd think to see. Besides it was one of those really weird euro looking things not as big as they can be...a yukon and it probably would be closer to the impossible to see around unless he was driving on the bodstots .

[W661335PF]

As a judge, this is what this sounds like: If you were attempting to look around an SUV via the right side (as you seem to describe) and your sitting on the left side of you own vehicle, the only way possible was to cross the line in its' entirety, no matter how much you lean within your seat (and it can't be by much since the G affords you limited room for leaning over). The bottom line is that your defense sounds false, no matter how you word it. I think you're dead in the water, if the judge is paying attention. I asked my wife, who is an attorney, to read this-- this was her assessment within seconds. She also stated that if your record pops up on the computer, whether you mention it or not, as judge, she would be inclined to hang you with the max sentence/fine possible. Thirdly, irrespective of the cops words to you, the ticket is written and his words are not reflected in the citation, so what you say will be treated as hearsay for the most part-- unless what he said was outlandish (racist, sexist, etc.), at which point the cop may be pulled in. Of course, you may get lucky if the judge is not paying attention.

Good luck.

[C-Kwik]

I would even tell the truth about your driving record - this is info the judge has easy access to. Your arguement is that because of your record you are extra careful.

I disagree. It is typically much better to stick to the main argument. Going outside of it not only opens the door for ther potential arguments, but also simply looks bad. Especially when it's a bit of a stretch....

[BigWill]

LOL...very good question ..ahh but from the passengers view ya can I leaned my body and head as far over as the seatbelt would let me so I didn't have to go over as far as you'd think to see. Besides it was one of those really weird euro looking things not as big as they can be...a yukon and it probably would be closer to the impossible to see around unless he was driving on the bodstots .

So... let's see if I understand this correctly. You have a history of poor driving decisions, and then tried to, from a left driving position, move your car to the right side of your lane to look around an SUV by leaning out of your seat. (Oh, and scared the **** out of a CHP officer to boot!). Is that about right?

I support your attempt at Trial by Declaration, because you would be TOAST appearing in court. Leave out any reference to the make of your vehicle, aside from mentioning that it has a low seating position. Also, keep your personal views, traffic record, goals to improve it, etc. out of the letter. It needs to be a simple statement of facts. You are not chatting with a good friend about the situation. The judge wants to know what happened from fact A through fact Z.

Just my .02 Good luck to you!

[champagneG35]

So... let's see if I understand this correctly. You have a history of poor driving decisions, and then tried to, from a left driving position, move your car to the right side of your lane to look around an SUV by leaning out of your seat. (Oh, and scared the **** out of a CHP officer to boot!). Is that about right?

I support your attempt at Trial by Declaration, because you would be TOAST appearing in court. Leave out any reference to the make of your vehicle, aside from mentioning that it has a low seating position. Also, keep your personal views, traffic record, goals to improve it, etc. out of the letter. It needs to be a simple statement of facts. You are not chatting with a good friend about the situation. The judge wants to know what happened from fact A through fact Z.

Just my .02 Good luck to you!

Thanks for the honesty & the wish of good luck, to clearify though about that "history of poor driving decisions" without going into to much detail that history is pretty much all speeding tickets and driving on a suspended due to too many points, it was not for accidents. I just wanted to make that clear as it sounded by your statement you thought it was for poor decisions that led to accidents or something.

[BigWill]

Poor driving decisions are just that... it could mean speeding, exhibition, accidents, or simply scaring the poo out of a peace officer! lol

I meant no disrespect, as I have my own glass house!

[W661335PF]

Poor driving decisions are just that... it could mean speeding, exhibition, accidents, or simply scaring the poo out of a peace officer! lol

I meant no disrespect, as I have my own glass house!

BigWill is absolutely correct-- poor driving decisions are poor driving decisions, irrespective of the situation or outcome (and you drove while your license was suspended?????).

There's a part of me that wishes you well and hopes this is a real lesson, but there's also a part of me that clearly reads a lack of remorse or recognition on your part of the bigger picture.

My nephew of 29 ran over a 3 year old almost 10 years ago (speeding in his low-rider)-- he still has nightmares and suffers from severe anxieties. Numerous moving violations, fines, a suspended license, jail time for driving with a suspended license, all had no deterrent effect-- instantly killing this child permanently changed his driving habits and haunts him.

I also mean no disrespect here, but my thinking is this may not be the last time for you. Glad you don't drive in my neighborhood (Rio de Jenairo), cops would have killed you by now. Good luck.
Modified by W661335PF at 1:36 PM 12/18/2007

[champagneG35]

Duley noted and I respect your opinion no disrespect taken , I know speeding, etc. is still a decision just didn't want everyone thinking I don't know how to drive and am a danger to everyone with no respect to life or property, I do know how to drive but like most all who buy a sports coupe or sedan I enjoy driving. I understand what you are saying but I truly believe I was doing it safely and not usually much faster than traffic's already going. Sometimes I'll admit when it's 3am or something and deserted on the freeway I've driven faster but that's cause there's no cars for anything to go wrong into just myself. Like I've said in another post. I ride a motorcycle as well and am very aware of my surroundings. I don't speed through neighborhoods or places where children can run out of nowhere on a regular basis. On a bike if I were to hit someone unlike a car I get hurt or killed as well. I've been riding for 18 years and still alive not without other people not seeing me or sometimes cutting me off and actually hitting me.

I'm not one who thinks it can't happen to me, it can and I know that. I will also let you know my style of driving has changed alot due to my past experiences. It doesn't make it right I know, all I'm saying is I'm very careful about it because if I'm not I wont last a year out there on a bike and driving a car doesn't take any of that caution away.

...and yes I drove on a suspended license to get to work and back or I'd lose my job. I didn't go out joyriding around town. That's all behind me now though and I'd like to keep it that way. Believe me I have my own regrets about everything I did stupidly in the past it hurt the pocket book alot.
Modified by champagneG35 at 3:49 PM 12/18/2007

[Bobby23]

Bobby23 is telling you make sure the officer doesn't show up .... wait what?

what i was saying was that if the officer does not show up you will most likey win in court...i didnt say make sure the cop does not show up! lol

[zozoka1212]

I think if you rewrite the whole thing and try to go from the other side of it. In my opinion this case won't make any good for you. I would try to approach from a different view. How about the SUV front of you was doing some stupid movement (maybe cutting you off from the other lane)and you were just getting ready for an emergency stop/move to the right to save the day and avoid a fatal collision. Something like that would do better. Of course wrapped in nice words. They cannot argue with safety/emergency stop/ pull aside. After all the shoulder is for that.

zozo

[G_whizz]

Yes... another car was merging into your lane and you had to "brake and avoid" the shoulder was your only option.

[mmm kouki]

fight it!!

[zozoka1212]

I think that would be his best option. Also put it at the end you know you don't think avoid a serious collision would make you guilty at the end and end up with a ticket.It is just would not be fair. Just rip the heart out of the judge.

zozo

[zozoka1212]

Bobby23 you think it would work. You are a cop so you probably know better then us. I think it would be his best way to go.

zozo