acuradan69

On, Tueaday 11/6/01 10:40PM i got a speeding ticket on the Eastbound I495 at exit 35(nassau county), NY. I was in the leftmost lane(there were 3-4 lanes) and the cop car was sideways on the shoulder
(see diagram)

IIIII =<-cop car
IIIII
IIIII
IIIII
IIIII
IIIII
II<--my car

As soon as I saw him I started braking. My valentine one didnt beep one bit or alarm me at all(and i paid 400 bucks for this gadget). According to the officer, I was traveling 89 in a 55 zone which was impossible as I was following the traffic pattern of all the cars ahead of me. At MOST I would be traveling 80, but nowhere near 89. Traffic was pretty heavy, and everything was moving along briskly. There were cars in all lanes of the road.
I will have to go to court for this. Anyone have any advice on how I can get this dismissed, or any advice on what my options are???
thanks

DAN
acuradan69@aol.com
98 2.3CL silver-aem CAI, dc headers, tanabe gpower catback, venom400, apex springs(they suck, i want eibachs!), koni adjustables

haiduc

in MD you can go in like one week before the ticket and ask for a full investigation from the court clerk for the citation issued. that means they have to dig up all the information about the officer, training, calibration fo the gun, traffic cnditions. basically a whole bunch of crap that they dont wanna waste their time on for a speeding ticket.

if not you could always explain to the judge the traffic conditons and why you think that the citation is not a valid one.

if nothhing else, the officer has to prove the speed that you were going by showing you the reading on the radar gun. if you asked to see the reading and he refused then there is something wrong with the way is is working.

all of this applies to MD. i dunno the rules where you live, but i hope this helps a little.

good luck man.

Eggplant-EX

First off, I am in a different State.. but get a lawyer. Traffic court lawyers charge a flat fee and I paid $325 for mine. It is usually cheaper in other States.

I did not want a speeding ticket on my record so I fought it. Long story short, I paid a $25 fine for a defective muffler..

BSK181

what was the means of determining your speed? it should be on the ticket.
radar
laser
paced

acuradan69

the ticket doesnt say anything on the ticket. All I know is that the cop car was stationary when I passed him and my valentine one remained silent...

JasonT

Being from Staten island, & the NY area, I know cops sometimes just pick out cars to pull over. Hopeing to catch someone that has warrants, or outstanding tickets etc. Sounds to me that's what the cop did. The ticket has to state by what means he got your speed. 89 is high & sounds too accurate to have been a pace. And a pace will yeild a round number, like 60, or 70. Also the cop wasn't moving, so a pace is doughtfull. The only way I would think the ticket would be valid, would be if a chopper from the air clocked your speed, by paceing, radar, or laser. Then radioed the cop ahead, to pull you over. I know in NYS they like to do that too. Ever noticed those white lines that go from side to side on some roads. Those are pace marks, that a chopper uses to see how fast you are going. The have the distance between them, & measure the seconds it takes to go from 1 to another. Look at the ticket too. See if anything is missing. Like a date, or the wrong date, etc. I got out of a ticket on the west shore, because the cop put the wrong date on the ticket.

Scorpius

Normally I'd say pay it and shut up... but the cops obviously singled you out. He probabyl saw the Xenons and figures get the guy with those cool headlights. Anyway, he couldn't get you with radar accross how many lanes of traffic with cars in them, no clear line of sight, he can't pace you standing still at an angle from far away accross X lanes of traffic. What did he use? ESP? Fight it and see what happens. I thinnk you'll at least get a reduced charge.

acuradan69

any other tips??

EricL

Questions?

Were you at the VERY END of the pack?

Did you hit the brakes before or after you were even with the cop's car?

What did he say -- or did he say nothing?


I don't know what this is worth -- but in one off my traffic school "lessons", one of the instructors made a comment regarding flow-of-traffic and not wanting to be the first or last car in the pack (going over the speed limit)...

Could it be that the cop picked you off like a lion taking down a straggling gazelle?

--???--

davo-cls

I went to court Thursday for a speeding ticket. I plead guilty, the judge sent me to traffic school to watch a 2 hour video and the ticket got dismissed never to appear on my record. Total out of pocket expense...$60.

acuradan69

I was in the middle of the pack and I hit the brakes before he was lined up with me...
When he stopped me, pretty much, i asked for a break, and he was like i dont give breaks for 89 in a 55!

davematthews-CLS

always ask to see their radar, just for later uses. he probably got you with laser if he was in that position, thus valentine not making any noises or he wasn't even clocking you. in any case just get a lawyer and let him clean it up. good luck.

acuradan69

Anyone know what Section 1180 Subcode B is?? I want to look it up for traffic court.....please respond asap...
thanks

kensteele

Yeah, always ask to see the radar numbers. That way when he shows you a big 89 on the display, you can say "Hey that's not me..."

Too dangerous to get out of your vehicle and go sit in the front seat of a patrol to look over the radar...also it's not within the law, cops doesn't have to show you anything.

I think you need a lawyer. No way a police car can clock you while stationary and you don't get anything on the V1...unless it was laser in which case even though the V1 does pickup laser, it may not have in the particular case. Was the cops outside of his vehicle, outside the door, the window? Laser does not work thru the windshield.

Did you ask him how he clocked you? If he had responded "radar" you can call his bluff and say "hmmm, my radar detector didn't even go off" to which he will respond "I got the super duper snooper stalker model that can't be detected...", yeah right. Then he would have had to write "radar" on the ticket and that's where you start your case with.

acuradan69

I beleive he was inside his vehicle. I didnt ask how he clocked me. I dont recall seeing him sticking any laser gun or anything out of his vehicle, just his car stationary as the illustration above showed....ummm anyways, my court case is 7pm tomorrow...maybe I can delay it(is it possible)...Know ay good lawyers in NASSAU country and how much does it cost???

acuradan69

actually the court case got rescheduled to sometime in the future....anyone want to add any more input?
thanks

gjr2001

Yea, always ask to see the speed on the radar. If you still don't believe the prick just file a motion of discovery. You don't need agood lawyer for this, it seems simple that you can most likely get it thrown out if you were to show up alone. Most cops don't like testify in court, so you already have an advantage there. Don't sweat, just find a cheap lawyer, you don't need the big wigs for a traffic case.

Neech

Where is your V1 mounted? If it's up high near the tint band, becareful it's not behind the tint bad. That band will almost make laser detection impossible. The windshield alone has a bad enough effect on laser (and radar) detection, letalone the tint band.

If he was perpendicular to the highway, it was mostly likely a laser shot. By the time you got close to him, he probably had your speed and had place the laser gun down and was getting into gear to follow you.

Another scenario is he was part of a speed trap team. A cop that you had passed befor reaching this cop was actually clocking cars as they passed and radioing ahead to the one who actually pulled you over.

Your best argument is that you were in the middle a group of cars following the flow and there's no way you could have been going that fast. Plead to a lower speed and save some money. Sometimes they'll let you off if you "donate" $50 to whatever if you agree to plead guilty to a lower speed or charge like "unreasonable speed for conditions" or something.

Good luck.

Eggplant-EX

First thing is to reschedule the hearing. You did good there. That was the first thing my lawyer did. I think it throws the Officer's schedule off.

Get a lawyer!! When i went to court for my speeding ticket, I did not say a word. The whole Court thing is so different when you go in with a lawyer.

My 51 in a 35: pled down to a $25 fine for a defective muffler

Lawyer's fee" $350.

Yeah! Paying the fine would have been cheaper but I just did not want it on my clean record.

Bladerunner

Your speed was more than likely measured using VASCAR (Visual Average Speed Computer and Recorder). This procedure is not only used by aircraft but also by a stationary vehicle and an officer standing on the road side setting the computer. That is what the white landmark lines are for on the interstate. This DOES NOT need to be noted on the ticket. Your radar/laser detector will not pick this up, period. Laser could of also been used. You already mentioned you were doing 80MPH so doing 89mph is a possibility. I hope you did not tell the officer you were doing 80, not 89. This will be noted in his notes, which does not have to be on the ticket.

Go to court, ask for traffic school, if you have not been yet, and pay a very minimal fee. If the officer was a traffic investigator he keeps very detailed notes on all his traffic related contacts. You will not win in court, at least here in CA. Judges are fed up with fast cars and speeding. Most cities have dedicated traffic officers now so they will show up for court with all the documentation in order. Hope this helps, I was a TI for 6 years.

Deckard

98BlackCL

I got a ticket for 60 in a 40 and went in before my court date without a lawyer and talked with the DA. They reduced my ticket to improper equipment and I had to go to a driving school for 4 hours. It sucked, but at least my insurance didn't go up. You'll probably end up with something similar.

Titand19

I live right between exit 35 & 36 on 495. The cops pull over so many people everyday. I'm surprised your V1 didn't go off. I was thinking about getting one, but now I'm not so sure. Good luck in court. Are you going to the one in Hempstead, that place is a bitch.

peiqinglong

acuradan69, this is what you can try if it's not the case that bladerunner (I learned something new today!) suggested...My friend got a speeding ticket for doing over 100 and this is what he argued. Basically cops have a tuning fork device that tunes their radar to show correct speed. They have to keep records of their tuning to prove that the speed they are radaring people is accurate. Take the cop to traffic court at which time he or she must provide documentation that the device was tuned correctly and that he or she did in fact radar you for the speed he or she claims. If the cop cannot produce such documentation, then what he or she claims becomes in a sense hearsay. Then you can request a dismissal. But if he or she brings paperwork that shows all this...hrmmm...sorry bud...outta luck...

MattR97

Now being that i am a law student i can not give you anything but my opinion ,which is on the record, here is some facts of NY law hope this help you out a bit your attorney will have access to that and more.

A defendant must be fully apprised of the facts and law which he is being accused of having violated. In a traffic matter, the defendant is entitled to receive, in addition to the simplified traffic information with which he was served, a supporting deposition, N.Y. Crim. Proc. Law § 100.25(2), by the police officer containing factual allegations of an evidentiary character which supplements the simplified traffic information and supports the belief that defendant committed the offense charged. The defendant has an absolute right to a supporting deposition before the commencement of trial.

The opinion evidence of police officers, uncorroborated by mechanical devices, will be sufficient to sustain a speeding conviction. A police officer's estimate of speeds based upon his experience may be one means therefore of demonstrating that a defendant has been guilty of speeding. In order for the trier of the facts to be fully cognizant of all factors relevant to the patrolman's experience and ability to estimate the speeds of moving vehicles, a defendant may properly present evidence or cross-examine the officer in relation to his training, etc. In addition, in order to obtain a fair trial, the defendant should be prepared to cross-examine the police officer on his ability to estimate the speed of moving vehicles and the requested information is germane to that ability.

The next post will be a case to look at hope it helps you good luck!

MattR97

On February 25, 1977, the defendant, [***3] Robert S. Gutterson, was issued a uniform traffic summons by a member of the Nassau County Police Department which charged said defendant with a violation of section 230.02 of article 2 of the Ordinances of the Village of Lattingtown in that he allegedly operated his motor vehicle within the Village of Lattingtown at a speed of 52 miles per hour in a 40 mile per hour zone.

If a radar unit [***4] was used to measure the speed of defendant's automobile, defendant seeks to obtain service records for said unit and when it was last calibrated before February 25, 1977, as well as records for maintenance and calibration thereafter.

3. Finally, defendant requests personnel records of the arresting officer, i.e., test scores or grades in determining or measuring his ability to use equipment for recording the speed of motor vehicles, test scores or grades measuring his ability to visually estimate the speed of motor vehicles, the deficiencies [*1107] and margins of error therein and the dates when said patrolman was given refresher or training courses in the use of such equipment and/or his ability to estimate speeds of moving vehicles.

It is fundamental to our system of justice that a defendant must be fully apprised of the facts and law which he is being accused of having violated. In this matter, the defendant is entitled to receive, in addition to the simplified traffic information with which he was served on February 25, 1977, a supporting deposition ( CPL 100.25, subd 2) by the police officer containing factual allegations of an evidentiary character which supplements the [***5] simplified traffic information and supports the belief that defendant committed the offense charged ( CPL 100.20, 100.25, subd 2). The defendant has an absolute right to a supporting deposition before the commencement of trial. ( People v De Feo, 77 Misc 2d 523, 524.) Accordingly, the complainant police officer is directed to file a supporting deposition with this court and cause a copy thereof to be served upon the defendant.

In addition, in order that the defendant may be able to properly prepare and conduct his defense in this matter (see CPL 100.45, 200.90), this court is satisfied that defendant is entitled to more particularization about his alleged violation than is contained in the simplified traffic information. Therefore, the prosecuting attorney is directed to serve a bill of particulars upon the defendant specifying the means by which the police officer determined the defendant exceeded the speed limit. Simply to state that a defendant was traveling a certain speed above the designated lawful rate is insufficient to inform the defendant so that he may prepare his defense. In addition to a police officer's independent estimate of the defendant's speed, there are [***6] a number of instruments or devices which may be employed to accomplish the same objective. As Judge Namm noted in People v Perlman (89 Misc 2d 973, 976), radar detection of speed has made great advances and various types of "radar devices have gained wide acceptance in all courts". If a speed detection device was employed to clock defendant's speed, he should be apprised of the manufacturer and model name and number of said device in the bill of particulars. This is at least necessary in keeping with the spirit of affording a defendant an adequate opportunity to prepare for his defense. In order to properly defend himself, is a defendant in a traffic matter required to bear the unreasonable burden of coming to [*1108] court prepared to try his case, anticipating every available device on the market employed by the police departments to detect speeds of motor vehicles?

Defendant's request for information relative to the maintenance and calibration records of a speed detection device, if one was used to measure defendant's speed, is denied. The previous direction to provide defendant with the name of the manufacturer, model and number of said device is ample disclosure [***7] to assist defendant in preparing his defense.

Finally, defendant requests disclosure of certain personnel records of the arresting officer in the custody of the Nassau County Police Department which would bear on the officer's ability to estimate the speeds of moving vehicles. It is well settled in this State that the opinion evidence of police officers, "uncorroborated by mechanical devices, will be sufficient to sustain a speeding conviction." ( People v Olsen, 22 NY2d 230, 231; see, also, Matter of Sulli v Appeals Bd. of Admin. Adjudication Bur., 55 AD2d 457, 461.) A police officer's estimate [**1001] of speeds based upon his experience may be one means therefore of demonstrating that a defendant has been guilty of speeding. In order for the trier of the facts to be fully cognizant of all factors relevant to the patrolman's experience and ability to estimate the speeds of moving vehicles, a defendant may properly present evidence or cross-examine the officer in relation to his training, etc. In addition, in order to obtain a fair trial, the defendant should be prepared to cross-examine the police officer on his ability to estimate the speed of moving vehicles and [***8] the requested information is germane to that ability.

There has been no demonstration that the records requested, if they exist, constitute investigatory files compiled for law enforcement purposes and which thereby would be exempt from disclosure ( Marshall v New York State Police, 89 Misc 2d 529). Traditionally, records of law enforcement agencies have been exempted from public disclosure and only recently through the "Freedom of Information Law" (Public Officers Law, art 6) has that restriction been relaxed. However, access to an agency's records under this law is not without limitation (Public Officers Law, § 87, subd 2; see Matter of Westchester Rockland Newspapers v Mosczydlowski, 58 AD2d 234). The information sought by the defendant in this action does not fall within any of the protected areas under this statute.

Courts have recently permitted disclosure of records of the [*1109] complaints and investigations of civilian complaints against a police officer ( Walker v City of New York, 90 Misc 2d 565); a copy of the "rap sheet" or arrest record in respect to the People's witnesses ( People v Howard, 89 Misc 2d 911); and "a number of courts have granted [***9] discovery of a wide range of official documents, including police arrest, investigative and incident reports [cases cited]" ( People v Simone, 92 Misc 2d 306, 312).

In addition, the Legislature in 1976 amended the Civil Rights Law so as to provide a means to obtain "[all] personnel records, used to evaluate performance toward continued employment or promotion, under the control of any police agency or department of the state or any political subdivision thereof * * * as may be mandated by lawful court order" (Civil Rights Law, § 50-a). This legislation established a uniform rule in relation to the production of police personnel records. ( Guzman v City of New York, 91 Misc 2d 270, 271.) The enactment further provides certain procedural safeguards to protect against the unbridled disclosure of said personnel records.

An ample opportunity has been afforded the People to be heard on defendant's application. This court is satisfied that information relative to the patrolman's ability to estimate the speeds of moving vehicles which may be contained in the officer's personnel file is material which may be necessary for the defense during the trial of this matter and to aid [***10] in cross-examination on the issue of credibility. (See People v Sumpter, 75 Misc 2d 55.) This decision is not a license nor shall it serve as an authorization that in every instance a defendant will be permitted to conduct an unfettered or untrammeled search of a police officer's personnel file. The determination of such applications must be made on an ad hoc basis with the court being the final arbiter as to whether the defendant has demonstrated the relevancy or materiality of the information in the personnel records to warrant disclosure (cf. People v Lugo, 93 Misc 2d 195).

Accordingly, the Nassau County Police Department is directed to produce the personnel records of the officer involved to the Trial Judge sealed, for examination and determination by said Judge as to whether any information contained in such records should be made available to defendant to aid in cross-examination or for other use at the time of trial. (See People v Sumpter, supra, p 61; People v Simone, supra, p 315.)

Chief F1 Fan

I am a lawyer in NYS so here goes . . .
If you have a clean license, the municipality you have to report back to for the ticket has a HUGE interest in getting the ticket moved down to a non-moving violation b/c it, instead of the State, gets the fine. So, go in and talk to the Town Attorney (City, whatever) tell him the circumstances of the ticket (if he will listen); and, ask to get it reduced to a non-moving equipment violation (NYS Veh & Traf. Sec. 375-loud muffler, bald tires, something like that) The bad part is the town gets to charge you for the ticket as if it were the speeding ticket (this could be a HUGE fine) and you will likely have to go to traffic school for 6 hours on a Sat. Once you get this done, you'll have a point-less license.
OTOH, if the town atty doesn't go for it, THEN hire an atty to represent you.

Good luck!

Scooter

i also live at Exit 36 of the LIE (Port Washington), and i know exactly the area u're talking about...if the cop was just doing a stakeout, not physically doing any speed traps, then u may have been nailed back a couple exits, and this particular cop was radioed to pull u over...LIE is not patroled by helicopter, only radar by the Interceptor's, and MAYBE laser...since the LIE is not covered by the State Troopers, Nassau County has it's own highway patrol that goes from exit 33/34 through the 40's, then Suffolk County picks up coverage...i'd definitely fight this one, b/c the explanations u got seem too shady...if u got nailed a couple miles back, they should have told u...simply following a pack is not reason enough to pull u over, unless the cop thought that he had u since u braked (i try to NEVER brake unless i have no choice...downshift a gear or 2 takes a lot off quickly, esp from 4 - 3), or Nassau County is in such debt it has to resort to this crap...sounds like the latter to me personally, but that's just my opinion.

Bluto

He got you with the above or the VASCAR Bladerunner described. Do you have the white strips on LIE? They are usually on a hill.

Depending on what they got you with, you could plead mistaken identity. If the issuing officer did not directly measure your speed, say a similar vehicle must have been clocked, and they pulled you over by mistake.

Gator CL-S

I'm no lawyer, but...

1. Ask for Model # and Serial # of radar detector.

2. Ask for maintenance records of this radar.

3. Ask for scores and certification of the officer in using the radar.

4. Ask for the models, serial #s, and maintenance records of all other radars that the patrols use.


If they cannot provide you any of the above information, you should be able to get the ticket thrown out of court since you do not have access to evidence being presented against you.