My question involves a traffic ticket from the state of: California
Hi,
I was convicted of violating 22349(b) driving over 55 maximum. It was daytime, clear and sunny, and I was driving on a rural highway with no obstructions. I saw a dark SUV parked on my side of the road in the distance of about 2000 feet away. I reduced to 51 mph. After passing, he followed for 2 miles and pulled me over. He claimed he had me on rear radar doing 75mph. During the stop, He never stated that he visually witnessed me speeding (confirmed by video). I asked me how fast I had been going and I replied 62. *I had issues with my car having been stolen and the transmission had been tampered with. I had been pulled over two weeks prior where another officer had visually estimated me doing 42 but I had been keeping it about 35*. The CHP officer issued a citation. Right before the trial, I received his notes and video (MVARS). In the video, he stated that I had first entered his radar at 13 over the speed limit (68mph) even though his notes stated visual at 800ft of 75 and radar lock at 75-71 also at 800ft.
At trial, the officer testified that he had a strong radar doppler reading (not in notes nor MVARS) and that I had entered his cone at 1000ft doing 75. I introduced his notes showing 800ft and he stated 1000-800ft (no mention of 1000ft in the notes). WHen I brought up the 13 over, he quickly rebutted that he was mistaken. I asked how he could reconcile this discrepency, but he remained silent. He did state he had been using fastest speed mode and did mention something about 3/4 mile away, but that would be behind him and beyond the scope of driver side mirror.
The judge concluded that I had been speeding, but not doing 75. The judge reduced the fine and offered traffic school. My question is that if the judge rejected the 75mph claim by the officer (both visual and radar), did he eliminate the reasonable suspicion to have pulled me over in the first place. Would the exclusionary rule have applied? Does the perjury by the officer have an effect? I feel the officer had committed perjury and I want to fight it. The court has given me till tomorrow to either file an appeal with teh appellete court or to do traffic school and finish this. I want to fight it but I want to have a chance. Also, I feel it is wrong for CHP officers to pull people over and claim they are doing speeds that is not correct. He clocked it in at 71 because that was one mph higher to increase the fine. Thanks!
Hi,
I was convicted of violating 22349(b) driving over 55 maximum. It was daytime, clear and sunny, and I was driving on a rural highway with no obstructions. I saw a dark SUV parked on my side of the road in the distance of about 2000 feet away. I reduced to 51 mph. After passing, he followed for 2 miles and pulled me over. He claimed he had me on rear radar doing 75mph. During the stop, He never stated that he visually witnessed me speeding (confirmed by video). I asked me how fast I had been going and I replied 62. *I had issues with my car having been stolen and the transmission had been tampered with. I had been pulled over two weeks prior where another officer had visually estimated me doing 42 but I had been keeping it about 35*. The CHP officer issued a citation. Right before the trial, I received his notes and video (MVARS). In the video, he stated that I had first entered his radar at 13 over the speed limit (68mph) even though his notes stated visual at 800ft of 75 and radar lock at 75-71 also at 800ft.
At trial, the officer testified that he had a strong radar doppler reading (not in notes nor MVARS) and that I had entered his cone at 1000ft doing 75. I introduced his notes showing 800ft and he stated 1000-800ft (no mention of 1000ft in the notes). WHen I brought up the 13 over, he quickly rebutted that he was mistaken. I asked how he could reconcile this discrepency, but he remained silent. He did state he had been using fastest speed mode and did mention something about 3/4 mile away, but that would be behind him and beyond the scope of driver side mirror.
The judge concluded that I had been speeding, but not doing 75. The judge reduced the fine and offered traffic school. My question is that if the judge rejected the 75mph claim by the officer (both visual and radar), did he eliminate the reasonable suspicion to have pulled me over in the first place. Would the exclusionary rule have applied? Does the perjury by the officer have an effect? I feel the officer had committed perjury and I want to fight it. The court has given me till tomorrow to either file an appeal with teh appellete court or to do traffic school and finish this. I want to fight it but I want to have a chance. Also, I feel it is wrong for CHP officers to pull people over and claim they are doing speeds that is not correct. He clocked it in at 71 because that was one mph higher to increase the fine. Thanks!
Filing for Apellete Court in California (Speeding Ticket)
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire