Tustin PD on 261

[BlueBooster]

Alright, so I'm getting ready to do a TBD. Back in June I was going into work (about 9:30am) taking the 261s which turns into Jamboree. The tickect says location of violation was Jamboree and Walnut. This tells me he had to of been hiding on the on ramp for walnut. Jamboree is 5 lanes wide at that location. When he pulled me over he told me he clocked me on radar doing 85 in a 65. What he put on the ticket says he used laser. The ticket states Approx speed as 85, P.F./Max Speed as 65, traffic as medium, cloudy, dry and day as scene conditions. If he said he used radar, why did he mark laser? Is this something that will help in the TBD?

Any suggestions for when I write up my TBD?

[nurb2]

The copy you got could be slightly off from the original. I have one where it looks like it's marked PM when the original was marked correctly as AM. Did you request a copy of the officer's ticket and notes via discovery?

22349's are tough to beat. All they really need to prove is you were driving over the max speed. Good luck. I have a 22349 TBD coming up too ...

You never know. The last time I was in court fighting a ticket, a Tustin PD officer got to the stand and said he could not find his notes. Judge threw the case out on the spot. Maybe the same moron ticketed you.

-nurb2-

[BlueBooster]

Well, I beat my last 22349 from chp. I hope to have the same outcome.

The am/pm boxes are lot closer than the laser/radar, so I don't think would be it. The writing is real neat a doesn't look like he could have slipped the paper.

How do you go about requesting a copy of their notes and copy of the original ticket? You mentioned discovery? What is that? Thanks in advance for the help. Hope your's goes well too.

[nurb2]

You have to mail a discovery request to the district attorney with a list of things you want (technically, someone else has to mail it for you).

Discovery is your right to obtain information that is necessary for you to develop your defense. The District Attorney's office is required by law to provide certain information if a request for Discovery is made. If the prosecution refuses or fails to provide the legally requested information, you can file a motion for dismissal for Lack of Discovery.

Check out http://helpigotaticket.com/proc/discover.html for some more info.

If you lose the TBD, you can even request a copy of the officer's declaration he filed with the court, and use it in your Trial De Novo. It's a public record so you don't really need to use discovery to get it.

Good luck.

-nurb2-

[BlueBooster]

Well, we will see how it goes - this is my TBD I plan to submit. If anyone has any input, please let me know now! I plan to take this down to the court on Monday during lunch.

I respectfully submit this written declaration to the Court pursuant to CVC40902. I plead Not Guilty to the charge of violating CVC22349(a).

The facts of my case are as follows: While I was traveling south bound on Jamboree, in moderate traffic at 9:30 am on 6-19-06, I was stopped by Tustin Police Department Officer Thornton (Serial #918) and charged with violating CVC 22349(a), 85 mph in a 65 mph zone.

I know that I was not traveling 85 mph and that my speed was safe and reasonable for conditions. At the location indicated on the citation, Jamboree is a 5 lane road filled with vehicles at 9:30 am on weekdays with an additional lane of traffic merging onto Jamboree. I travel this road frequently to and from work and find it difficult to believe one could target a single vehicle with laser, much less radar. The signal that was received could very well have been that of another vehicle around mine.

I trust in the Court's fairness and believe that my citation should be dismissed in the interest of justice. If the court does not find in my favor 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.

CVC40802(c)(1)(D) requires that:Â* The radar, laser, or other electronic device used to measure the speed of the accused meets or exceeds the minimal operational standards of the National Traffic Highway Safety Administration, and has been calibrated within the three years prior to the date of the alleged violation by an independent certified laser or radar repair and testing or calibration facility.

The Officer should provide documentary proof that his LASER meets or exceeds National Highway Traffic Administration Standards in accordance with CVC40802(c)(1)(D). At minimum, the officer should provide documents to the court proving that his LASER has been calibrated within 3 years by an independent certified testing or calibration facility pursuant to CVC40802(c)(1)(D). If the officer cannot provide this evidence to the court, his LASER evidence is inadmissible and my case should be dismissed. I urge the court to not accept hearsay testimony in lieu of documentary evidence to verify required laser calibration. If the calibration was completed, documentary proof should be provided.Â* Â*Further, the officer should prove that the testing facility was certified and independent from the police department.Â*

CVC40802c(1)(B) states:" When laser or any other electronic device is used to measure the speed of moving objects, the arresting officer has successfully completed the training required in subparagraph (A) and an additional training course of not less than two hours approved and certified by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training." If the officer does not provided documentary proof of this special laser course completion, my ticket should be dismissed.

Finally, the officer must prove, pursuant to 40802 (c)(1)(C)(i) that he established prior to issuing my citation that his LASER was properly calibrated within three years to NTHSA standards.Â*

This standard is stated clearly in the code which establishes that a conviction is not warranted unless “The prosecution proved that, prior to the officer issuing the notice to appear, the arresting officer established that the radar, laser, or other electronic device conformed to the requirements of subparagraph (D).� If the officer does not prove this standard, my case should be dismissed.

The purpose of the strict legal standards in police use of electronic means to determine speed is to prevent abuse of this technology through poorly trained operators or defective uncalibrated equipment. These should be considered minimum standards by the court in protecting defendants against the power of the state. I respectfully ask the hold to uphold these minimum standards of protection.

The officer must provide documentary proof to verify the required standards of his laser equipment and operator training. If these legal standards are not each properly and fully documented, I urge the court to dismiss my citation in the interest of justice. Please do not accept hearsay statements in lieu of documentary evidence.

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.

[Sam Smash]

wow, what a way to turn the tables on the cop.

[BlueBooster]

I hope it works... ~crosses fingers~

[Evolution.VIII]

Good luck.

[jinheeis]

Bluebooster,

I was very impressed by your written declaration. I have a similar case as Cop also put down Laser. I am going to used your statement for the reference.
I wonder how your case went. Did judge decide on your favor?

[boostinbyyou]

Holy necro bump batman!!!

[Macky]

damn n00bs trying to get post count up.

[#1Noob]

Is Bluebooster around to answer the question? Inquiring minds need to know. Half the reason I come into these Law Enforcement threads is to see the outcome.