TicketHELP.com is considered a premier source for nationwide traffic ticket information–a place to “find attorneys, get answers and discuss and learn about traffic tickets and driving related matters”.

Our News and Commentary section will be updated regularly. Our intention is to create a large, useful collection of advice and information concerning driving, law enforcement on our roadways, the relevant legal systems and issues and how the current economy potentially affects all of this.

We welcome comments on any of our posts.

First, critics argue this simply amounts to a quota system. There may be no official “number” of tickets mentioned, but it’s a reasonable conclusion that whatever police officials consider to be “enough” tickets essentially constitutes the quota.

Second, the traffic ticket push is connected to a campaign by the department to crack down on moving violations in high-crime areas of the city and at the same time check the drivers for warrants and weapons. Residents are complaining that there is now overly aggressive policing where, for years, officers on patrol overlooked many minor violations such as a broken taillight. Residents and civil-rights leaders are concerned that using traffic stops to search for warrants, etc. simply encourages racial profiling of drivers.

While police officials will always argue that they have every right to pull over any motorist the see commit any violation of any size, their motives for these increased car stops are certainly worth questioning.

Submitted by NY traffic lawyers
Feifer & Greenberg, LLP

Stacie Flowers Rae certainly wasn’t expecting jail time when she made the decision to contest her Alabama speeding ticket. She claims District Judge John Steensland sentenced her to jail for the speeding charge in order to send a message to the rest of the people in traffic court Thursday who planned to contest their tickets.

Rae said she was handcuffed and placed near the front of the courtroom while Steensland heard other cases. Based on what she saw, she felt the Judge’s intimidation strategy worked. She was the first bench trial of the day and she watched others who originally seemed intent on contesting their charge as she did enter a plea of guilty instead.

Her last piece of evidence convincing her that she was used as a prop to scare the other motorists? At the end of the court session, the judge reduced her sentence to fines and court costs. Court records indicate Rae was found guilty of speeding at 9:38 a.m. and sentenced to 10 days in jail. At 11:17 a.m., her sentence was changed to zero days in jail. Her total fines and court costs were $209.

Steensland says he did it because she was “lying”. Maybe she was (we’ll never know) but the fact that she was the first case of the day, sentenced to jail time and left to stand handcuffed in front of the rest of the motorists only to see her sentence reduced once the other motorists finished their cases seems a little suspicious.

While Steensland denies the original sentence was an intimidation tactic, he ultimately issued an apology. Bottom line is no one should ever be discouraged from having their day in court. The odds may be stacked against a typical traffic violation defendant, but at very least everyone should have a chance to contest the charges against them without fear of minor court surcharges to cover the extra time a hearing takes or penalties, such as imprisonment, that are way more severe than the penalties given to similarly charged motorists who enter a guilty plea.

Scott Feifer
NYC Traffic Ticket Lawyer

Four of those five tickets have now been dismissed by motions of either the prosecutor or arresting officer. While it may not be entirely clear from these pictures as posted here, four of the drivers were simply not Larry Fitzgerald.

These ticket dismissals show the risk law enforcement runs when they choose to replace live officer traffic enforcement with automated enforcement methods. A photograph cannot automatically determine the name and pedigree information of driver. The best a state can do is issue the ticket to the registered owner of the vehicle and then make a choice–either prosecute as a parking ticket, where the ID of the actual driver is of no consequence, or try to prosecute as a moving violation but run the risk it will be dismissed if the registered owner named on the ticket was not the actual driver of the vehicle.

This was a good example where prosecuting as a moving violation didn’t work out.

Getting burned by Larry Fitzgerald’s speed is nothing new – we see it every football Sunday. Getting burned by his friends speed, however, is another story altogether.

Previously, anyone who received a speeding ticket or similar violation would have to either deal with payment or scheduling via mail or in person at one of the Clerk’s district locations.

All such services are a welcome convenience. Individuals can now respond to their traffic violations without worry about whether anything sent by mail was received and/or properly processed and without having to come in person and wait on line to perform a simple transaction.

A couple of things to note. First, the Clerk does charge a $5 fee per ticket for the convenience of using this website to pay your violations this way. In addition, you must be 18 years or older. Finally, it must be a “Court Diversion” ticket (one where a personal appearance is not required).

The website handles the following violations:

• Failure to wear a seat belt
• U-turn in intersection
• Failure to stop at a stop sign
• Disobey turn signal indicator
• Failure to yield to pedestrian in crosswalk
• Improper right turn
• Turn on red prohibited

The proposed system also would allow motorists to pay their fines online.

The reasons for building such a system are pretty straight forward.
It’s part convenience (easier for motorists and enforcement officers)
and part economic (more automation means fewer administrative clerks).

Submitted by Scott Feifer

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 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

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

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