Archive for December, 2009
Texas traffic ticket program helps the needy Tuesday, December 22nd, 2009
Sansom Park is a small community of about 4,000 people, located in Tarrant County, Texas (Dallas/Fort Worth area). The police chief started a ‘Tickets For Tots’ program a few years ago. It seems like a great idea.
A driver who is pulled over in this area during the holiday season will have a choice. Either bring unwrapped toys to the police station or proceed with the traffic ticket. About 90 percent choose to bring the toys.
It’s very hard to not be cynical about any program that relies on car stops and the issuance of traffic tickets. Maybe the most cynical will argue that officers will be extra aggressive in an effort to increase the number of donated toys or will argue that a judge will view them as a holiday scrooge for contesting a ticket instead of contributing to the cause.
While the cynics will always be there, this seems to simply be a good program. The traffic ticket fine money–which in most states goes to who knows what/where–is having a direct, immediate, positive impact on the community. Good for them and we should hope for similar programs around the country.
Submitted by Scott Feifer
New York traffic lawyer
NYTicketHELP.com
Newark NJ first in state to issue red light tickets via camera Wednesday, December 16th, 2009
As of Wednesday December 16, motorists in downtown Newark will be monitored by cameras at certain intersections. If they disobey a red light at any of these intersections, they can expect to receive notice of an $85 fine.
Newark is the first city in New Jersey to issue red light summonses using red light camera technology. More than 20 other towns have been approved by the state’s Department of Transportation to install red light cameras.
The majority of residents in NJ are in favor of these cameras. A survey of 1,000 licensed motorists found 75 percent favored the cameras.
As always with red light cameras, there are those who feel the cameras make an intersection safer and those who question that very fact. Some suggest that altering yellow light cycles to accommodate the cameras or people slamming on their brakes to avoid being caught on camera can actually be more dangerous than if there were no cameras at all.
Either way, the cameras are now in NJ and New Jersey drivers can expect more of them soon.
Submitted by Scott Feifer
New York Traffic Attorney
Feifer & Greenberg, LLP
NYTicketHELP.com
NY teens learn about dangers of texting and driving Saturday, December 12th, 2009
As part of a nationwide awareness campaign about the dangers of texting and distracted driving, teens in Suffolk County and Nassau County NY recently pledged to not text and pay attention while driving.
Students in Bethpage and Babylon took park in Allstate’s “X the TXT” campaign. The campaign compares texting while driving to to driving with your eyes closed. The timing of the campaign is no coincidence–the holiday season is one of the deadliest times for teen drivers.
Learning to drive today is not like it was 25 years ago. Where the only distraction used to be turning a dial to the left and right until one of 3 stations you liked came in clearly, drivers today must avoid the distractions of smartphones that can text, email, etc, satellite radios that scroll information across the screen and GPS units which talk and continually update on it’s screen. Moreover, hybrids and other energy efficient vehicles will soon be here and will bring more complications and things to monitor on a typical dashboard.
New York recently enacted a law specifically prohibiting texting while driving. Federal statistics show distracted driving was to blame for nearly 6,000 deaths and 500,000 injuries in 2008, though it is unclear how many were the result of texting in particular.
Allstate’s program sounds like a good one–getting drivers into the habit of paying attention from the time they start driving is a step in the right direction.
Submitted by Scott Feifer
NYC Traffic Tickets
Feifer & Greenberg, LLP
NYTicketHELP.com
California speeding tickets. Who keeps the fine money? Friday, December 11th, 2009
Typically, when a traffic ticket is adjudicated in court, the fine and surcharge money is split to some extent between the state, county, municipality and court. The split makes sense because it’s generally a state law that is violated on a local road and adjudicated in a local court.
Some cities in California are now attempting to cut the state out of the picture by issuing California speeding tickets under local administrative codes. With no state statute involved, there is no longer a link to the state.
One such city is Newman (Modesto, Stanislaus County) California. Under a new procedure, $150 speeding citations will be issued under a city ordinance related to obeying a speed limit sign and not the State California Vehicle Code.
This means the citations will not carry license points since they will not go through the state Department of Motor Vehicles. This arguably creates a “win-win” situation for motorists and the city. The losers? The state and insurance companies who may have raised rates had there been convictions and points placed on a driving record.
Riverbank speeding tickets and Alameda County speeding tickets have been handled in a similar fashion. Others considering this may be scared away by some legitimate legal concerns.
In a 1994 decision Morehart v. County of Santa Barbara, the California Court of Appeal expressly prohibited local jurisdictions from using ordinances to escape the requirements of state law. “Local legislation in conflict with general law is void,” the court ruled. “Conflicts exist if the ordinance duplicates, contradicts, or enters an area fully occupied by general [state] law, either expressly or by legislative implication.”
Another concern is that the procedure could violate the equal protection clause of the state constitution because the administrative procedures give police officers the ability to treat different classes of drivers with greater or lesser punishments.
While it’s true that some motorists may never have the opportunity to take advantage of this or perhaps this practice will eventually end after state legal challenges, it’s a win of sorts for some motorists in the short term.
Submitted by Scott Feifer
NY Traffic Ticket Lawyer
Feifer & Greenberg, LLP
NYTicketHELP.com
Confusion on La. 22 leads to slew of traffic tickets Thursday, December 10th, 2009
At what point should transportation authorities and traffic courts acknowledge a problem with a traffic sign if a large number of people keep making the same mistake and misreading the same situation on a roadway?
Drivers are arguing that the large number of traffic tickets issued by Sorrento police on La. 22 is evidence of the failure to communicate. La. 22 is a four-lane highway with a median that runs past a community college. A cut-through in the median lines up with the college’s main exit.
The cut-through appears to offer a direct path for drivers to exit the college, cross the southbound lanes of traffic (which pass in front of the college) enter the cut-through and make a left turn into the northbound lanes. Traffic signs on the median cut-through, however, say “Do Not Enter” and “One Way,” with the one-way arrow pointing in the direction of southbound traffic and opposite the direction of a left-turn heading out of the median.
Sorrento Police argue that the meaning of the signs is clear–don’t enter (thus the “Do Not Enter” sign) the median and attempt to make the left turn to head northbound. If you exit the college, you’ll need to head southbound only (thus the “One Way” sign).
Sorrento Police Chief Earl Theriot Jr. said the signs’ meaning is clear: Drivers leaving that school exit cannot make a left turn through the median. No sign at the intersection specifically indicates a left turn is illegal, but, the chief says, if you cannot enter the median, you certainly can’t turn through it.
This semester, officers stepped up enforcement and started writing tickets, probably close to 75 so far. Officers park their patrol cars near the college exit and pull drivers over for making the left turn. Most drivers claim ignorance when pulled over.
The question is whether this is actual confusion by the motorists or defiance of the law masked by a claim of ignorance.
If such tickets are challenged in a Louisiana traffic court, it will ultimately be up to the judge to decide.
Submitted by Scott Feifer
NY Traffic Ticket Lawyer
Feifer & Greenberg, LLP
NYTicketHELP.com
Judge’s severe penalty simply for contesting tickets results in lawsuit Wednesday, December 9th, 2009
Marion County (Indianapolis) traffic court Judge Bill Young instituted a policy when he took the bench on January 1, 2009 that defendants found guilty after contesting a traffic ticket would be fined an additional sum of up to $500. He’s posted signs in his courtroom warning that the court can impose up to $500 in fines against defendants. Some defendants have been scared away from entering a not guilty plea. They are worried that, no matter how much they may disagree with the traffic ticket issued, it’s too risky to fight A guilty finding would result in too much of a fine and simply paying is the safer option.
A local attorney perceived this to be nothing more than unfair intimidation.
Paul K. Ogden filed a lawsuit alleging that traffic court Judge Bill Young’s threat of imposing additional court costs against defendants who unsuccessfully fight an Indianapolis traffic ticket violates due-process rights in the U.S. and state constitutions. Neither Glenn Lawrence, administrator for Marion County’s superior courts, nor Judge Young had anything to say about the lawsuit at this early stage. Lawrence did mention that the additional $500 is within statutory limits and there is nothing wrong with warning motorists that they may ultimately be fined near the high end of the range of legal fines.
Ogden, however, maintains that Young uses the threat of the $500 fine specifically to discourage people from challenging their tickets and ultimately keep his court from becoming more crowded . While Lawrence argues there’s nothing wrong with warning a motorist of what the fine may be, Ogden is essentially arguing that the way the fines are applied–high if you fight, low if you roll over and pay–is the primary problem with all this.
This is important. If this is accurate–a judge is basically punishing people simply for exercising their Constitutional right to confront their accuser–it’s dangerous. It’s one thing to examine the facts on a case by case basis and offer those who don’t proceed to trial “leniency” to the tune of a plea bargain of sorts. It’s an entirely different thing to systematically charge people simply for exercising their rights. It’s a challenge worth following.
Submitted by Scott Feifer
New York Traffic Ticket Attorney
Feifer & Greenberg, LLP
NYTicketHELP.com
Speed Deterrents Wednesday, December 9th, 2009
Speeding tickets, speeding violations, speeding citations, speeding summonses; No matter the name, they are all more or less the same thing. They are all evidence that a police officer believes an individual was exceeding the speed limit.
What happens, however, when the conversation turns to how to prevent individuals from speeding in the first place? Cynics among us will argue that no one has an interest in reducing the number of people speeding. They will argue that the only focus is on issuing more tickets and generating more fine revenue. While that might be true in some instances, there are certainly a very large number of people from different segments of society who are genuinely interested in safety and reducing the number of speeders on the road.
Measuring the number of people who exceed speed limits on our roadways is not as simple as counting the number of speeding traffic tickets that are issued. Sometimes, the increase in speeding summonses is attributable to an increase in the number of officers enforcing the speed limit or an increased effort (crackdown?) by the existing enforcement officers. Consider a situation where 2 out of 10 people speeding are issued speeding tickets on one day and 4 out of 10 people speeding are issued speeding tickets the next day. The number of speeding tickets issued has doubled but the number of individuals exceeding the speed limit is exactly the same. Speeding tickets measure the number of people caught and not the number of people who were actually speeding.
The difficulties in measuring aside, debates on how to best reduce the number of individuals who exceed the speed limit continue in communities around the country. Focus is generally on:
Increased speed enforcement. An increase in enforcement works in two ways. More enforcement generally means more speeding summonses issued and more speeding tickets today should lead to more cautious drivers tomorrow. In addition, the simple visual of more enforcement officers on the road (and fear of receiving a speeding summons) is likely to cause more people to slow down and obey the speed limit. The arguments against increased speed enforcement include the costs involved, removal of enforcement officers from situations where they could be preventing more serious crimes and a public relations backlash (people will assume increased enforcement is about revenue generation even if it is truly in place for safety purposes).
Increased speeding ticket fines. Some argue that if people were more worried about the direct costs associated with receiving a traffic ticket that they would slow down. While very large increases may serve that purpose, it’s unlikely that such large increases would ever be approved. Instead, opponents say that if the existing fines, surcharges and potential insurance increases are not enough of an incentive to slow down another $50 or $100 or even $250 is unlikely to make a difference. Moreover, there is a public relations issue similar to what we see with increased enforcement as many are likely to view an increase in fines as more about revenue generation than about public safety.
Physical speed controls. While not really an option on highways, many local communities consider controls like speed bumps and more stop signs to be the answer. These serve to physically prevent individuals from speeding. While it is unlikely that anyone will argue that these controls are about revenue generation more than safety, opposition does exist. Certain controls like speed bumps can be controversial because of the damage they can cause to cars. The issue of who is liable comes into play and it’s a headache some communities look to avoid.
As long as there are speed limits there will be drivers who continue to exceed the speed limit. Enforcement officials are presented with the challenge of walking a fine line—control speeding while avoiding the appearance they are motivated by money, not safety. As automobile safety evolves and the technological war between speed enforcement and speed detection rages on, this same issue of how to get people to slow down is likely to exist throughout it all.
Submitted by Scott Feifer
New York Traffic Ticket Attorney
Feifer & Greenberg, LLP
NYTicketHELP.com
Speeding Ticket Court Trial Questions Wednesday, December 9th, 2009
Speeding Ticket Court Trial Questions: Traffic Court
It’s common for a person to come see me after receiving a speeding ticket and ask “what is my defense?” or “what questions should I ask?” in traffic court to get the speeding ticket dismissed. “If I go to speeding ticket court, what trial questions will be asked and how should I answer them?” Before I even get into specific questions, I say to first consider the following:
- Did you answer the ticket and enter a plea of not guilty? Before we worry about a defense or questions for cross examination, I like to make sure everything is current with the case status. If a deadline to respond to the ticket has passed, your license can be suspended for failure to respond. Moreover, a (traffic) court could issue a warrant (“traffic ticket warrants” as my clients like to call them). You may not make America’s most wanted list if a traffic ticket warrant has been issued but it certainly won’t further your defense or case in general and probably won’t reflect well in traffic court.
- Forget all that stuff you heard or read such as “the officer must do this” or “that method of enforcement has been proved fallible in court”. There are no “systems” or “programs” or some individual set of questions and defenses that work in every case. Every state is different (different laws, procedures, accepted arguments, etc.) and there are often differences from county to county within a state. The only advice you should accept, whether it’s from a book, website or traffic ticket attorney, should be advice specific to your jurisdiction and your court.
- Be careful when you consider offering traffic court a “defense” or “justification”. In many situations, you will essentially be testifying that you “were speeding, but should not be found guilty because…” If the Judge doesn’t believe or accept your argument you will have basically admitted you were speeding and just about lost your chance for the speeding ticket dismissal. I always warn clients and potential clients to be very careful before going this route.
- Is plea bargaining your speeding ticket to a lesser violation an option? In any conflict, I’ll always recommend an attempt at negotiating before fighting. Before getting involved with an “all or nothing” traffic court speeding ticket trial, if a favourable deal can be negotiated it should certainly be considered.
With that out of the way, I then inform clients and potential clients that it is very difficult to set forth, in advance of the trial, specific court trial questions for a speeding ticket case. I think people want to hear that there is a magic bullet-”isn’t there some case law which proves radar is fallible?”-but there is very rarely such a magic, premeditated argument. In a typical speeding ticket court trial case, the questions we ask the police officer will be determined mostly by the testimony he offered. For example, if he forgets to mention his training, I’d focus on that. If his numbers with respect to distance and/or time don’t seem to add up, then I’d focus there.
The more practical issue when proceeding to trial is “what to listen for”. Of course, “what to ask” is still important but it’s completely dependent on what you hear in the first place. The “correct” questions to ask are dictated by what the officer says (or perhaps fails to say) during his testimony. If you do end up defending yourself at a speeding ticket trial, I recommend focusing on the officer’s discussion/description of the following:
- Who, what, where and when. A prosecuting attorney or officer trying one traffic court case is likely trying many. Files and paperwork can easily get shuffled. Make sure your name, the speed cited, the date/time and the location of the speeding violation offered by the Prosecution at trial all match what was written on your traffic ticket.
- How did the officer measure your speed? Was it a visual estimation, a mechanical device (laser or radar) or both? If laser or radar was used, how does the officer know it was working? Were there tests performed, are there repair/test logs kept by the police department?
- When was the officer trained and who trained him? Visual estimations, laser and radar all require training. This training must be offered by someone qualified to train and this training must have taken place prior to the issuance of the speeding ticket in question.
- Was there notice of the speed limit in question? A Judge can’t find someone guilty of doing 50 in a 30 unless the officer testified that the motorist passed a visible 30 mph sign in that area.
In my opinion, the facts as set forth by the officer surrounding these issues are the building blocks of a successful defense in traffic court. That said, I do feel that it takes experience and skill to build that defense. When I notice a red flag (for example, questions about the officer’s training) I know what to ask as a follow up, when to ask, how to get the answer I want from the officer before the officer can anticipate where I’m going and cover for his mistake, etc. While some people will represent themselves and recognize mistakes and perhaps follow up appropriately, more people are likely to fail to recognize a potentially helpful argument if one should emerge.
Where a good attorney might very well ask a number of speeding ticket court trial questions in an effort to get a speeding ticket dismissal, it’s rare that these questions are all set prior to the trial. It’s therefore very difficult for me to simply tell someone what questions to ask at a speeding ticket trial. A successful defense at trial starts with someone who knows both what to listen for and what questions to follow up with based on what he does or does not hear when an officer testifies. This is why I tell everyone who gets a ticket to speak with an attorney first. A good, local attorney can let people know what to do from the minute a ticket is issued and, if the case ends up in a traffic court for a trial, should have the skills to maximize their chances of success.
Submitted by Scott Feifer
New York Traffic Ticket Attorney
Feifer & Greenberg, LLP
NYTicketHELP.com
If you are pulled over… Wednesday, December 9th, 2009
One of the most interesting aspects of my job as a New York traffic ticket lawyer is the fact that just about anyone, no matter where they live, what they do or how much money they have, may ask for assistance or advice at some point. Traffic tickets, driver license suspension, points on a driver license—these are issues that don’t discriminate and issues any of us may have to deal with from time to time.
The majority of people ask me what to do after they’ve received a traffic ticket. While there is clearly much to be said about that, this article is instead for those who may want some advice on how to avoid getting a traffic ticket in the first place.
I usually tell people it’s pretty simple. First, don’t get pulled over. Drive carefully in every sense of the phrase and the odds of receiving a ticket will drop dramatically. Sounds obvious, but it’s a simple first step that’s often overlooked—people I talk to seem to want to attribute being pulled over for speeding to everything other than the fact that they might actually have been speeding.
If you are pulled over, do not assume you are being issued a traffic ticket. While I have no official statistics, casual conversation with the police officers I’ve dealt with over the years suggests that maybe 25% or more of car stops do not result in a traffic citation. Perhaps it’s a minor equipment malfunction or other issue that will simply result in a warning or perhaps the officer is just in a good mood. My advice is to talk, act and think as if there is still a chance that you can avoid being issued a traffic ticket (because there is).
With that in mind, here is what you can do (or not do) or say (or not say) after you are pulled over but before you are issued a traffic ticket that may help you avoid being charged with a traffic violation.
- Take a deep breath and don’t panic. If the officer is directing you to pull over, use your signal if you need to change lanes or direction of travel. Look for a safe place to stop but also look to stop as quickly as possible. You don’t want the officer thinking “this person has no idea how to drive” while approaching your vehicle simply because you had a momentary lapse in reason once you saw the sirens behind you.
- Avoid moving around while waiting for the officer to approach your vehicle. The officer’s first task is to ensure his own safety. If he thinks you are trying to hide something (weapons, drugs) he could become agitated. Keep your hands on the wheel and stay still.
- Keep your seatbelt on. Yes, you know the officer will ask for your license and registration. Wait until he asks and then unbuckle your belt and reach for these items. First, by avoiding unnecessary movement, you are less likely to make the officer nervous. Second, you’re not tempting the officer to issue you a seatbelt summons—let him see that you were wearing it all along.
- Be polite. Maybe the officer was just going to warn you about some minor equipment failure he noticed. Don’t give him a reason to turn that warning into a summons. Moreover, officers tend to have better recollection of cases where there was some confrontation on the road. When it comes time to deal with the officer later, you don’t want to stand out as a motorist who gave him a hard time.
- If you have a PBA card or other document or information which you feel might discourage the officer from issuing a summons, use it wisely. Don’t shove it in an officer’s face as soon as he gets to your window. Be polite, and while you are giving him the paperwork he requested you can show or tell him why he may want to reconsider and why you are sorry. If you are mentioning an officer in particular, know which town or precinct he’s in and be prepared to explain your relationship.
- Know where your paperwork is. Your insurance and registration and driver license should all be readily available. If you don’t have something or can’t find it, now you are essentially asking the officer to give you two warnings (one for the underlying reason for the car stop and one for the missing paperwork). The odds of the officer letting two violations go will naturally be less than the odds of the officer letting one violation go.
Some officers are going to issue the traffic ticket no matter what you do. However, it’s certainly worth doing whatever you can to maximize the chances that you will drive away with a mere warning.
If you are ultimately issued a traffic ticket, my advice is to talk to a local traffic ticket lawyer. A good traffic ticket attorney will simplify your situation and let you know what options are available to you. Different people have different needs, different driving records, different potential consequences, etc. Everyone’s situation is a little different and everyone can benefit from knowing what they are facing after a traffic violation summons has been issued. Most attorneys offer some kind of a free consultation and I’ll always recommend pursuing that option first and foremost so you can make educated decisions going forward.
Submitted by Scott Feifer
New York Traffic Ticket Attorney
Feifer & Greenberg, LLP
NYTicketHELP.com
