WavMixer
02-25-2006, 01:24 AM
About a week after my speeding ticket posted a while back (http://www.socalevo.net/index.php?option=com_smf&Itemid=26&topic=14742.0), I got a ticket for 21703 - Following to Close. Some cops write up motorist under CVC 21703 as a "replacement" ticket . An officer may stop a motorist for going just a few miles above the speed limit on the freeway as a pretext to see what else they might be up to (drinking, drugs, smuggling ferrets, etc.). When the officer finds no drugs, booze or ferret poop, he cites the motorist under this very subjective code in order to justify the unnecessary stop.
The vast majority of these tickets are written by the CHP on the freeway during morning and afternoon rush hours. In heavy rush hour traffic it can be virtually impossible to maintain a large following distance from the car in front of you. If you do so, several other cars will spot this "daylight" and scoot in front of you, again shortening your following distance.
Since the traffic itself can prevent the constant maintenance of an ideal following distance, the police should reserve these citations for the true tailgaters who attempt to intimidate other drivers to move over or to speed up.
I'm still waiting for the results of my TBD for the speeding ticket, so I wanted to stretch the distance out as much as possible for this citation. Wouldn't want the judge to see my name twice in the same week. So thanks again to our very own Blaze for bringing Ticket Assasign to our attention.
Below is a declaration for a "tailgating" ticket. The officer here did not cite a specific number of feet I was following because there is no specific safe following distance mandated in the law. Most officers assume a specific following distance, in feet or car lengths, that the motorist should have been observing. In this case the officer did not note the distance between cars or even a recommened distance I should have given.
I also point out here that the officer did not note the speed of the car being followed. Police note your speed on the ticket but almost never note the speed of the car you were following, an essential element in determining a safe following distance.
For example, if you are two car lengths back and are driving faster than the car in front of you, this could be very unsafe since you would be moving even closer to him. If you are two car length back and are driving at the same speed of the car in front, this may or may not be unsafe since you are maintaining a steady distance. If you are are two car length back and the car in front is driving faster than you, this is not unsafe at all since he is pulling away from you. An officer's failure to note the speed of the car you were following casts great doubt on his assertion that your were following too closely.
This is the TBD I'll be using to plead my case.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
Defendant's Name: Wav Mixer
Case No.: oI812
I respectfully submit this written declaration to the Court pursuant to CVC 40902. I plead Not Guilty to the charge of violating CVC 21703.
The facts of my case are as follows: On 11-30-05 I was driving on the southbound 14 Freeway in morning rush hour traffic. I changed lanes after signaling properly for a lane change, because I had to take the next exit.* After changing lanes I was pulled over by the officer and charged with violating CVC 21703, following too closely.
The officer told me that I was not speeding but alleged that I was following the car in front of me "too closely." At no point did the officer specify what "too closely" might be, nor did she note on my citation the distance behind the car I was allegedly following "too closely."
I was following a car safely at the time of my stop, several car-lengths back. I had always been taught that I should stay 2-3 seconds behind the car in front of me. (The California Driver Handbook advises motorist to use this "three-second rule" to determine a safe "Following Distance.") I was following the car in front of me at a safe distance with approximately a 2-3 second "space cushion" as advised by the DMV.
CVC 21703 Following Too Closely states: "The driver of a motor vehicle shall not follow another vehicle more closely than is reasonable or prudent, having due regard for the speed of such vehicle and the traffic upon, and the condition of, the roadway."
The officer neglected to note the relevant conditions upon my citation of
1) Traffic upon the road,
2) Condition of the road,
3) Why I changed the lane,
4) Speed of the vehicle I was following, and most importantly,
5) The distance between my car and the car I was allegedly following "too closely."
These facts would seem to cast reasonable doubt on her assertion that I was following "too closely."
I can state that traffic at the time of my stop was heavy, road conditions were good, and the vehicle I was following was traveling slightly faster than I and was therefore pulling away from me. As such, I believe that I was following at a safe and prudent distance.
It is never easy to maintain a perfect space cushion in stop and go traffic; anyone who has driven California's crowded freeways can attest to this. However, I did my best to do so in heavy traffic. The officer's decision to cite me was overzealous: this violation was meant for tailgaters who intentionally drive too close to other vehicles, not for drivers struggling through heavy traffic to exit the freeway.
I believe that a reasonable interpretation of CVC 21703 proves my innocence in this case and I ask the Court to dismiss my citation and return my posted bail of $147 in the interest of justice.
If the court does not find in my favor in this case, I request a fine reduction and a court assignment to attend traffic school.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.
The vast majority of these tickets are written by the CHP on the freeway during morning and afternoon rush hours. In heavy rush hour traffic it can be virtually impossible to maintain a large following distance from the car in front of you. If you do so, several other cars will spot this "daylight" and scoot in front of you, again shortening your following distance.
Since the traffic itself can prevent the constant maintenance of an ideal following distance, the police should reserve these citations for the true tailgaters who attempt to intimidate other drivers to move over or to speed up.
I'm still waiting for the results of my TBD for the speeding ticket, so I wanted to stretch the distance out as much as possible for this citation. Wouldn't want the judge to see my name twice in the same week. So thanks again to our very own Blaze for bringing Ticket Assasign to our attention.
Below is a declaration for a "tailgating" ticket. The officer here did not cite a specific number of feet I was following because there is no specific safe following distance mandated in the law. Most officers assume a specific following distance, in feet or car lengths, that the motorist should have been observing. In this case the officer did not note the distance between cars or even a recommened distance I should have given.
I also point out here that the officer did not note the speed of the car being followed. Police note your speed on the ticket but almost never note the speed of the car you were following, an essential element in determining a safe following distance.
For example, if you are two car lengths back and are driving faster than the car in front of you, this could be very unsafe since you would be moving even closer to him. If you are two car length back and are driving at the same speed of the car in front, this may or may not be unsafe since you are maintaining a steady distance. If you are are two car length back and the car in front is driving faster than you, this is not unsafe at all since he is pulling away from you. An officer's failure to note the speed of the car you were following casts great doubt on his assertion that your were following too closely.
This is the TBD I'll be using to plead my case.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
Defendant's Name: Wav Mixer
Case No.: oI812
I respectfully submit this written declaration to the Court pursuant to CVC 40902. I plead Not Guilty to the charge of violating CVC 21703.
The facts of my case are as follows: On 11-30-05 I was driving on the southbound 14 Freeway in morning rush hour traffic. I changed lanes after signaling properly for a lane change, because I had to take the next exit.* After changing lanes I was pulled over by the officer and charged with violating CVC 21703, following too closely.
The officer told me that I was not speeding but alleged that I was following the car in front of me "too closely." At no point did the officer specify what "too closely" might be, nor did she note on my citation the distance behind the car I was allegedly following "too closely."
I was following a car safely at the time of my stop, several car-lengths back. I had always been taught that I should stay 2-3 seconds behind the car in front of me. (The California Driver Handbook advises motorist to use this "three-second rule" to determine a safe "Following Distance.") I was following the car in front of me at a safe distance with approximately a 2-3 second "space cushion" as advised by the DMV.
CVC 21703 Following Too Closely states: "The driver of a motor vehicle shall not follow another vehicle more closely than is reasonable or prudent, having due regard for the speed of such vehicle and the traffic upon, and the condition of, the roadway."
The officer neglected to note the relevant conditions upon my citation of
1) Traffic upon the road,
2) Condition of the road,
3) Why I changed the lane,
4) Speed of the vehicle I was following, and most importantly,
5) The distance between my car and the car I was allegedly following "too closely."
These facts would seem to cast reasonable doubt on her assertion that I was following "too closely."
I can state that traffic at the time of my stop was heavy, road conditions were good, and the vehicle I was following was traveling slightly faster than I and was therefore pulling away from me. As such, I believe that I was following at a safe and prudent distance.
It is never easy to maintain a perfect space cushion in stop and go traffic; anyone who has driven California's crowded freeways can attest to this. However, I did my best to do so in heavy traffic. The officer's decision to cite me was overzealous: this violation was meant for tailgaters who intentionally drive too close to other vehicles, not for drivers struggling through heavy traffic to exit the freeway.
I believe that a reasonable interpretation of CVC 21703 proves my innocence in this case and I ask the Court to dismiss my citation and return my posted bail of $147 in the interest of justice.
If the court does not find in my favor in this case, I request a fine reduction and a court assignment to attend traffic school.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.