Washington Traffic Law Blog : Washington Traffic Lawyer & Attorney : Jon Zimmerman Law Firm : Seattle, Bellevue, Tacoma

Why is it that as you're taking time off to be with friends and loved ones, there are more police officers on the road writing tickets?  

Often on holiday weekends in the Seattle area and in high-traffic areas like I-90 and I-5 in the State of Washington, drivers will notice an increased police presence.  Part of this has to do with a need for more police responders to deal with additional collisions that occur over high-capacity travel times, but the reality is that many police officers make EXTRA MONEY - yes, overtime - when they work certain holidays.  Part of the extra money is to get officers to work on certain holidays where they might otherwise take the day off, and as an increased incentive to many law enforcement agencies, the federal government will grant money to local jurisdictions to increase the police presence in traffic enforcement (read: more tickets).  

What the means for Jane and Joe Driver is that Jane and Joe just might end up with a speeding, lane change, stop sign, negligent driving, or other type of traffic infraction this weekend.  

The important thing to realize is that if you are the unlucky beneficiary of one of these traffic tickets, you are not alone.  You do not need to panic.  If you get a ticket in the State of Washington, you can call a traffic attorney who can help to maintain your driving privilege and keep your insurance rates low.  

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Sen. John Kerry's daughter will not be charged with DUI due to insufficient evidence.  Despite her public arrest after she was pulled over for an expired tabs violation, Los Angeles prosecutors have declined to go forward because, to put it bluntly, they have no case.  So at most Ms. Kerry gets a traffic ticket, a type which probably has no effect on her insurance premiums.  And Ms. Kerry will not have to make repeated trips to court to be exonerated.  

Sure, so Alexandra Kerry was driving a car with expired tabs.  So what.  One King County judge even admitted in open court to having had expired tabs.  Happens to many drivers.  But at least prosecutors in Los Angeles realized that Ms. Kerry is an upstanding citizen and that a tabs violation shouldn't lead to a DUI charge.  

It also helped that Ms. Kerry probably did not give anything of evidentiary value to the police, beyond a below the limit breath test at the police station.  The daughter or a former prosecutor, Ms. Kerry probably knew to not respond to police questioning, to invoke her right to silence, to invoke her right to a lawyer, and to not take roadside tests.  Congratulations, Ms. Kerry, your sound judgment saved the day.  

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

In a matter of weeks, Washington drivers will no longer be allowed to legally hold and talk on a cell phone while driving. As state, county, and local governments look to "protect" you, my gentle readers from yourselves and the public, they're also looking to take a few of your hard-earned bucks off you by having the police pull you over, delay you, and write you tickets. Don't let the government take your money.

Before you use your cell phone while driving, get a hands-free device for your cell phone. Hands-free cell phone devices are allowed and they are the new, permissible way to drive and talk on your cell phone. Hopefully the devices will save you some money as well.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (11)
• Trackbacks

Recently the Seattle P-I published an article about a motorcyclist who was arrested for allegedly driving 164 mph in Oregon. Many drivers call my office to ask me if traveling a certain speed, such as 90 or 100 mph, constitutes reckless driving in the State of Washington. The answer is that any speed beyond  Washington's maximum speed limits could serve as prima facie evidence of reckless driving, which in Washington is a gross misdemeanor punishable by up to a year in jail and a $5,000 fine. The prosecuting authority would, however, have to prove the charge of reckless driving (which unlike a speeding infraction includes wanton and willful disregard of persons or property) to the criminal standard of beyond a reasonable doubt. So in Washington, if a driver is traveling 26 mph in a 25 mph zone, that person can be arrested (though it is unlikely and unusual). But if you're allegedly traveling 164 mph on a motorcycle, you are at high risk of getting arrested and charged with reckless driving. In most speeding cases, drivers are issued notices of infraction - that is, speeding tickets - which are civil infractions. The penalties for infractions do not include jail time, but the penalties do include monetary fines, higher insurance costs, and potential suspension or revocation of the driving privilege. But drivers in Washington should be aware that a police officer has the judgment call of citing a driver for reckless driving - and even arresting the driver on the spot - if the police officer believes the driver is disregarding the safety of persons or property. Getting stopped by the police can be a scary experience for many people, but luckily you have a lot of options and rights when you get stopped, cited, and even arrested. If you've received a citation and need help fighting it, give me a call, I can help.

UPDATE (NOVEMBER 9, 2008):

I realize the original post left out a few important points that I wish to clarify for my readers.  While officers maintain the "judgment call" of arresting certain drivers for reckless driving and citing other drivers for speeding infractions, I want to be very clear that an arrest for reckless driving does not mean a driver who was allegedly speeding is automatically guilty because the officer has chosen to make an arrest for reckless driving.  Although vehicular speed can in some cases amount to reckless driving, a driver can really no longer be lawfully convicted of reckless driving by evidence of speed alone where there is other evidence that a jury can weigh with regards to the offense, even though RCW 46.61.465  states that speeding shall be prima facie evidence of driving a vehicle in a reckless manner.  I have updated the original post to include the words "wanton and willful disregard of persons or property" with regards to reckless driving in order to avoid any confusion between speeding and reckless driving.

In 1994, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reviewed a King County conviction involving two vehicular assault charges.  The Court reviewed Washington's reckless driving statute  because driving a vehicle in a reckless manner was the predicate to the appellant's assault convictions.  State appeals had been exhausted, a defendant's constitutional right violated, and the defendant-appellant remained in jail. 

The Court stated:

But instruction number 7 isolated speed as the only circumstance needed to permit the jury to find reckless driving and thereby convict Schwendeman. The jury was told, in effect, that it could ignore all the other evidence, consider only the evidence of Schwendeman's speed, and if [the jury] found [appellant] was exceeding the speed limit, that was enough to convict him--not of speeding, but of reckless driving.
 

"By focusing the jury on the evidence of speed alone, the challenged instruction erroneously permitted the jury to" convict the appellant without allowing the jury to consider all of the other evidence. 

In short, the Court differentiated between speeding and reckless driving, and the Court reversed the state courts and ordered respondent to release the appellant from the King County Jail unless appellant could be granted, within a reasonable time, a new trial. 

The case is Schwendeman v. Wallenstein, 971 F.2d 313 (9th Cir. 1992).  

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Beginning January 1, 2008, drivers in the State of Washington face a ticket if caught reading, writing, or sending a text message while driving.  This especially will affect  drivers who work at Microsoft and other high-tech companies as these drivers often employ wireless technology while on the road. There are a few exceptions (affirmative defenses) to committing this infraction, such as sending a message to summon help in an emergency, but many if not most drivers caught texting while driving will face a ticket. However, there is some good news about this type of ticket, and some bad news. The good news first - this type of ticket (or infraction in legal lingo) is a "secondary infraction," meaning that a police officer has to have another reason to pull you over (speeding, unsafe lane change, etc.).  Also good news is that state law prohibits this type of infraction from being reported to insurance companies. So what's the bad news?  If you get cited for texting while driving, you'll likely end up cited for a second infraction - that is, the speeding ticket or driving on the shoulder ticket or other type of primary moving violation that got you pulled over in the first place.  Now you'll have two infractions to deal with and one that can affect your insurance. If you should receive a texting ticket with some other type of violation, please call me for a free consultation.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

In addition to the standard fine for a high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) violation having been raised from $101 to $124, police are using citizen drives to enforce traffic laws. In the State of Washington, drivers can call 206-764-HERO to report alleged HOV violators. According to a news report in the Seattle Times, the Washington State Patrol will actually send out warning letters to vehicle owners whose vehicle license plates are spotted by other drivers in the HOV lane. If a warning letter doesn't work (maybe the WSP receives more complaints?), then the WSP will apparently "stake out" the location of the alleged violation in order to "catch the cheater in the act." Aside from the enormous amount of resources the WSP must be spending to "stake out" a location to catch a person allegedly committing an infraction, this creates a shift in police resources - now the police, who are so concerned about HOV violations, are out on I-5 rather than staking out car theft locations. In addition, the WSP is sending warning letters to motorists who own vehicles even though these same motorists might not have been driving the vehicles they own when the vehicle allegedly committed a traffic offense. If you've received a traffic ticket, give my office a call, we can help.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Recently the Washington Department of Transportation released data collected January 1 - March 31, 2007, that ranked the top locations for vehicles moving faster than 90 MPH based on the highest number of vehicles traveling 90 MPH or quicker. Of the top 10 locations, 6 of them were in King, Pierce, and Snohomish Counties, in places including Issaquah, Fife, Seattle, and Tacoma. It is unknown whether every inch of state highway was tested, or whether western Washington was specifically targeted, or whether the top locations have a higher number of vehicles traveling 90 or over because more cars cross that area or if the vehicles traveling 90 or over actually amount to a higher percentage of speeding cars versus all cars that are traveling a given section of roadway. What is clear is that the State Patrol is stepping up enforcement (this means speeding tickets and other citations for traffic offenses such as negligent driving and reckless driving) in areas that it believes has a higher number of vehicles that speed.  This makes economic sense for the State Patrol - after all, the more tickets issued, there is arguably a better chance at committed findings and fines, all other things being equal. It is best for drivers to take notice of these stepped-up enforcement locations and if the unfortunate happens and you get a traffic ticket, give me a call, I can help.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

A new law that will make it easier for the police to issue a traffic ticket and impound (the fancy legal term for legally restraining) your vehicle will take effect on Sunday, July 22, 2007. Although the Legislature previously allowed the police to impound a vehicle for alleged criminal law violations and other circumstances (for example, the vehicle was reported stolen, or the vehicle is occupying a restricted zone), this new law allows the police to seize a vehicle if the vehicle is on a public street AND the vehicle has an expired registration of more than 45 days. BEWARE: This law change means that a police officer who pulls you over while you are driving, presumably so that your vehicle becomes parked on a public roadway, could ticket you and impound your vehicle if the registration is expired long enough. It could mean that if your vehicle is parked on the street outside your home, and you've not updated your tabs, your vehicle would be subject to impoundment if your tabs are expired for more than 45 days. Avoid the costly expenses of obtaining a traffic ticket and paying impound fees. Keep your registration up to date and if for some reason you cannot keep your registration up to date, move your vehicle onto private property.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks

According to a PEMCO Northwest Insurance poll released last month, Washington drivers who have household income of more than $75,000 a year are more likely than those of household income below $75,000 to speed and talk on a cell phone. Among those drivers who are more likely to speed, the poll found that these drivers are under-55 males who earn at least $75,000 with one or more children at home. The least likely speeders? Empty-nester females over the age of 55 who earn less than $75,000, as well as single drivers without children. But here's what the poll doesn't show: whether the more likely speeders are actually more likely to get pulled over and cited for a speeding ticket or another traffic offense. A conclusion in the poll is that one would think that drivers with children would slow down and obey the speed limit, "helping to ensure they'll be around to raise their kids." However, the poll says nothing about whether parents are more likely to be involved in fatal collisions or that the absence of fatal collisions will help parents be around to raise their kids any more than quitting smoking or abstaining from trans-fats. What is more probable is that PEMCO and other insurance companies will use this and other similar data as an excuse to raise insurance rates for certain groups of people. It could be that under-55 male drivers with higher income, especially those who receive a speeding ticket, will see a remarkable rise in their insurance rates. Those drivers concerned about insurance rates would be wise to fight their tickets.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (3)
• Trackbacks

Although we often talk about speeding tickets and traffic offenses here at home in the State of Washington, I wanted to take a few moments to reflect on traffic tickets abroad, and the rights we enjoy here at home. Yesterday marked America's 231st anniversary of the adoption of the Declaration of Independence. Each July 4, we celebrate everything that is great about America - our food, our flag, our freedom. But 231 years later, we still have it better in America than our brothers in Britain. Just last week, two British traffic rebels regretfully lost their appeal to the European Court of Human Rights, the court that Europe created to hear cases from citizens of member countries that traditionally have been unable to stay out of wars with one another. The issue in this case was the right not to incriminate yourself - a right so basic that we've had it in America since 1791. The idea for due process in the Fifth Amendment apparently was a British one stemming from the Magna Carta in 1215, but apparently what a fundamental right is in America doesn't really exist in (it's not so) "Great" Britain, or the rest of Europe for that matter. Here's what happened - Idris Francis and Gerard O'Halloran owned cars that were caught speeding by traffic cameras (not the police, mind your gap). Neither man would say who was driving their vehicles (O'Halloran admitted to driving but later retracted his statement), claiming a right to silence and a right against self-incrimination. We call that the Fifth Amendment here, but again, these individuals are British. The Court ruled against the men, 15-2, reasoning that if the men could "prove" that they didn't know who drove their cars AND if they could not be expected to know, they would then not be punished under British law. Wow. What an uphill battle - in Britain you're guilty until you prove you're not. I think there was a war over that! At the Jefferson Memorial in Washington, D.C., sunlight shines on a quote in the interior frieze below the dome: "I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." It is fitting that we remember that while we are free to not incriminate ourselves and to fight our traffic tickets here in the United States and in the State of Washington, our European ancestors do not enjoy that right. As we reflect on the basic rights we enjoy here at home, the words of Mr. Francis, who lost his case last month, is important to keep in mind: "The fight for freedom goes on. We can't allow the tyrants, who are taking away our rights, to succeed. They have to be stopped." Very Jeffersonian. Happy Independence Day. I hope you had a great 4th.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks

This was the topic of a recent news story, which did not get the answer quite right. The short answer is generally no, not at this time, and drivers should not go rushing to the stores to buy GPS devices to counter speeding tickets. (The exception would be if you could bring in an expert to testify about the high accuracy of GPS as a speed measuring device - and even then a court in Washington would probably be reluctant to allow such new technology into evidence). Imagine this: you're driving a long, minding your own business, and Officer TicketCop pulls you over and he issues you a speeding ticket. He tells you that your car, according to his RADAR (radio detection and ranging) device, clocked your vehicle traveling 10 miles over the posted speed limit. Simple enough, right? Not exactly. You counter that you have a GPS system, which stated that your vehicle was traveling less than the posted speed. Can you use the GPS measurement to counter the officer's RADAR unit? Not really. The law is not developed for courts to agree on using GPS as a speed measuring device. RADAR, although it has a lot of problems, has been around for a very long time, and used properly, courts will allow a measurement of speed based on RADAR into evidence. But GPS is newer and based on new technology, you argue. Well yes, that's true, but from a court's perspective, you would need an expert on GPS to vouch for GPS's accuracy as a speed measuring device as well as how it is properly used. Assuming you win on that, you would still have to show that GPS is better than RADAR, and that your GPS measurement is more accurate than the Officer TicketCop's RADAR measurement, and that you employed the GPS device correctly. GPS is used for purposes other than speed, whereas a RADAR gun is used to measure vehicle speed (and as a reason for Officer TicketCop to give a lot of traffic infractions). One of the problems with a GPS system is the user - a user would have to show that the user's GPS measurement is accurate based on the way the user employed the system. Likely a user who is also the driver would have a tough time vouching for speed and vouching that the device was being used properly at the same time. Also, while a GPS device may be useful in measuring the distance a car has traveled, and average speed over a long distance (say point Seattle to point Tacoma), there is no indication that GPS will measure one or more speeds accurately over fixed, shorter distances (say 800 feet) in a matter of seconds. If you just received a speeding ticket or any other type of traffic infraction in the State of Washington, call me, I can help.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

As local suburbs become strapped for cash, police are issuing more traffic tickets, especially speeding tickets. Take Fircrest, for example. Fircrest is a 1.5-square-mile Tacoma suburb of approximately 6,000 people situated between Tacoma and University Place. Unfortunately for drivers, Fircrest's elected officials are supportive of an increase in traffic citations. According to the Tacoma News Tribune, police issued a record number of traffic citations - upwards of 3,400 - from 2005 to 2006. Criminal citations are up a whopping 90 percent in the same time period! Officers, such as Police Chief John Cheesman (yes, that's really his name), are supported by $47,000 in overtime pay so that they may continue their extra patrols. Yes, officers are actually paid extra money to issue traffic tickets. Chief Cheesman recommends that speeders need to "slow down or go around" Fircrest. Apparently he is not very business-friendly and will not be heading Fircrest's Chamber of Commerce any time soon. Fircrest Mayor David Viafore is also "extremely proud" of the patrol program. If you have been one of the unfortunate recipients of a speeding ticket or other traffic citation in Fircrest, give me a call, I can help.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (3)
• Trackbacks

When drivers receive civil infraction tickets in the State of Washington, drivers have three choices: 1. Pay the fine (you're admitting that you committed the infraction) 2. Request a mitigation hearing (you also pay the fine and admit to the infraction, but a kind judge might lower the fine, provided that's allowed for the type of infraction for which you were cited); 3. Fight (contest) the ticket. Many drivers, especially those who get a Seattle ticket, think that requesting a contested hearing will get them a contested hearing. Unfortunately, in a number of locations around the state (most notably Seattle), that's not exactly true. For those drivers who smartly fight their tickets, Seattle first schedules a prehearing conference. State law allows local courts to decide whether they want to hold prehearing conferences. What this means for drivers is an extra step and often a waste of time. A prehearing conference is the civil equivalent of a pretrial conference in criminal law. At the prehearing conference, drivers appear in front of a magistrate in an office. The magistrate will attempt to get the driver to essentially mitigate the infraction, thereby saving court resources and obtaining revenue for the city, county, and/or state. Occasionally, a magistrate at a prehearing conference will dismiss an infraction, but this is very rare and drivers should not expect this. What drivers should expect is that if they go to the prehearing conference, they will have to wait and NOT be able to have a contested hearing on that same day. The magistrate knows that you won't be able to have a contested hearing that day, but he/she doesn't tell you until the end of the prehearing conference that you will have to come back to court on another day for a contested hearing if you'd rather fight your ticket than "take the deal." Prehearing conferences are mostly a scam. Most drivers are unaware that when they request a contested hearing and want their day in court, they might instead get a prehearing conference, they won't be able to fight their tickets on the same day as the prehearing conference, and the driver who wants to fight has to return to court, often taking time off work. Luckily, you can save yourself the hassle of prehearing conferences by waiving them in advance of the hearing, or hiring an attorney experienced in fighting traffic tickets. If you have been issued a speeding ticket or you have been cited for another type of traffic offense, don't panic - just give me a call.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (5)
• Trackbacks

Virginia Governor Tim Kaine (D) recently signed legislation sponsored by Delegate David Albo (R-Fairfax), a traffic attorney and member of Virginia's esteemed House of Delegates. Mr. Albo has been known to remind people that he occupies the seat of George Mason, the Father of the Bill of Rights. Del. Albo thought it was a great idea to raise speeding ticket costs for driving as little as 15 MPH over the limit. Such a ticket could cost a driver $2,500 in the Commonwealth of Virginia, and Virginia drivers get the added "bonus" of paying a $1,050 tax. Luckily, Washington drivers can breathe a sigh of relief that we do not yet have to face $3,550 speeding tickets in the State of Washington. Unfortunately, the increased costs in insurance that a traffic ticket or several traffic tickets can bring make driving a real headache, if not impossible, for many Washington drivers. If you recently received a traffic ticket in the State of Washington, I can help. Please call me for a free consultation.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (5)
• Trackbacks

Often I receive phone calls from citizens who have been issued a traffic ticket and/or arrested not because of anything these citizens were doing while driving, but because they were passengers in vehicles that were stopped for something totally unrelated to what the police officer is now alleging against the passenger. This begs the question: As a passenger, do I have the same right as the driver to challenge a traffic stop? Now you do. On Monday, the Supreme Court of the United States unanimously held that a passenger has the same right as the driver to challenge a traffic stop. The legal term is called standing, and now passengers have standing to challenge a traffic stop. 47 states and 9 federal circuit courts already held that when a car is pulled over, the passenger is seized for Fourth Amendment purposes--in other words, the passenger, as well as the driver, do not feel free to leave. However, California, Colorado, and the State of Washington have in the past held that passengers are not so seized. This most recent Supreme Court decision brings these three states in line with the rest of the country, and readers of this blog who are Washington drivers from Seattle to Spokane should be especially pleased. For those of you who are interested in this particular case, it's called Brendlin v. California, No. 06-8120. Here's a brief description of the major facts and the procedural history: A police officer in California, Officer Brokenbrough, illegally stopped a car that had a temporary operating permit. The officer knew that a renewal registration form was being processed, but he stopped the vehicle anyway. When he stopped the car, he recognized one of the passengers as "one of the Brendlin brothers," and one of the brothers was wanted on an arrest warrant. After other officers arrived, Officer Brokenbrough ordered Brendlin out of the car at gunpoint. Upon completing searches incident to arrest of the driver and passenger Brendlin, officers searched the car and found tubing, a scale, and other methamphetamine production components. The officers also found contraband on the driver. Brendlin moved to suppress all these items but the trial court found the stop lawful and the trial court denied the motion. Brendlin pleaded guilty and received four years in prison, subject to an appeal. Brendlin won his appeal at the Court of Appeal of California, but the California Supreme Court reversed and depublished the Court of Appeal opinion. The Supreme Court of the United States granted cert to decide whether a traffic stop subjects a passenger, as well as the driver, to Fourth Amendment seizure. As I noted earlier, the Supreme Court held that indeed, a passenger is also seized. The Court vacated the decision of the California Supreme Court, and the case is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings not inconsistent with the U.S. Supreme Court's opinion. Passengers can now rest a little easier in knowing that if their drivers are stopped, both driver and passenger will enjoy the same right to challenge the stop under the Fourth Amendment.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Although SpeedingTicketBlog does not venture too often onto the highways of nonmoving traffic tickets, readers should be aware that the City of Seattle Parking Enforcement Division issued citations in violation of the City of Seattle Municipal Code. If you parked on a legal holiday and you were wrongly issued a citation, you car might also have been impounded, and wrongly so. In response to a lawsuit filed last fall on behalf of drivers who were wrongly issued citations, the City of Seattle changed its parking rules. Â Still, the City might still owe hundreds of thousands of dollars in damages for the prior wrongful issuance of citations. The case is currently pending in King County Superior Court. For more information, read the Seattle PI's article here.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks

We've all been there - in the car with a loved one. But is it lawful to "hook up" with the driver of a vehicle? Last week, a Washington State Trooper pulled over the driver of an alleged drifting SUV on I-90. The vehicle's occupants were naked, leading the Trooper to believe that an act of physical intimacy had occurred while the vehicle was in motion. In this case, the driver was charged with DUI and the passenger with being a minor in possession of alcohol. However, the couple were not cited under the "embracing" statute. But what if the couple had been hooking up while the car was moving? In Washington, "Embracing Another While Driving" is actually considered prima facie evidence of reckless driving, a gross misdemeanor that is punishable by up to a year in jail and a $5,000 fine. The operator must have "in his or her embrace another person which prevents the free and unhampered operation of such vehicle." It seems, however, that a passenger could embrace an operator, as the passenger is not the operator of the vehicle, and hence the passenger is not embracing and driving at the same time. So if you're a driver in Washington, do not embrace others while driving, and if someone embraces you while driving, drive carefully!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

A new study that was released yesterday from the George Mason University Economics Department shows that out-of-towners are more likely to get a ticket during a traffic stop. The study was conducted in Massachusetts and showed that out-of-town drivers (this may mean out-of-state drivers) were at approximately 2/3 higher risk of getting a ticket. However, police officers in towns that are dependent on tourism dollars might write less citations to out-of-state drivers. I have not seen a similar study conducted in the State of Washington, but the moral of the story is this: be extra careful if you're an out-of-state driver and/or you have out-of-state plates, as your proximity to the courthouse and the officer's perceived ability of whether you will fight the ticket might weigh heavily on the officer's mind when deciding whether to issue you a traffic ticket.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Earlier this month, Gov. Christine Gregoire signed legislation that will allow the police to issue drivers traffic infractions if a driver is talking on a hand-held cell phone while driving or the driver is text-messaging. These laws go into effect in 2008 in the State of Washington. But BEWARE! If you are stopped and cited, you will likely be cited for two traffic infractions instead of one. How can this be? The Legislature made these new traffic offenses "secondary" offenses, which means that an officer must observe another traffic offense - or primary offense - prior to citing you for the secondary offense. So if you are behind the wheel and doing what an officer believes is speeding or making an unsafe lane change, and you're holding your cell phone to your ear at the same time, you can then be cited for two traffic infractions. If you have a cell phone and wish to use it while driving, you may obtain a hands-free device to use while communicating and steering. Of course, if you are the unlucky recipient of a traffic infraction, give us a call (on your cell phone if you prefer).

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

You just got off work, you're minding your own business, and as you're driving you're thinking about your evening's plans when suddenly you observe a police cruiser's lights flashing behind you. You safely pull over and the police officer, not pleased enough with your driver's license, registration, and proof of insurance, has decided to issue you a citation. Or maybe a couple citations! You politely take the ticket from the officer as you're now running late for the plans you have after a long day at work. So what do you do? First, don't lose the ticket! It's a piece of paper, like many other pieces of paper, but if you lose it you might forget about it, and this could cost you a lot of money later. When you get home, place the ticket in a place where you won't forget about it. You must respond to the ticket (or the Notice of Infraction in legal lingo) within 15 days from the day or evening you received it. Remember, courts and post offices are closed on Sundays and some major holidays, so it is possible that you could have even less than 15 days to respond. But how do I respond, you ask? Great question. You have three choices, all of which I will go over here: 1. You can admit that you committed the infraction and pay the fine amount on the ticket (this is box 1). This is the worst choice you could make, because the Department of Licensing will be notified that you committed an infraction; if you've been cited for a moving violation that doesn't fall under a statutory exemption, your insurance carriers will be able to find out about your citation for the next 3 years, and your insurance premiums can rise; and you end up paying the state, county and/or city a fine amount as outlined on the ticket. It's like one error in baseball that just resulted in the bases being loaded against you, with no outs. 2. You can check the second box on the back of the ticket, where you admit that you commited the infraction, but you wish to mitigate and beg a judge to reduce your fine. This choice *might* be better than #1 above, if you want to attempt to get the fine amount (what lawyers call a bail amount) reduced. The problem is that the court still finds you committed the infraction, the Department of Licensing still gets notice, and your insurance company can still find about most tickets and your premium can still rise. An additional problem is that you almost always have to go to court to take "advantage" of mitigation, and there's a chance that the judge might not reduce the bail amount because he/she doesn't want to, or because the Legislature has made the type of citation for which you were cited impossible for the judge to reduce the bail amount. 3. You can check the third box, and contest the ticket. This is the only choice that allows you, when you respond to a ticket, to challenge the citation(s) and get your ticket dismissed; to not pay a monetary penalty (bail amount); and to keep your driver's record clear of citations for insurance purposes. In my practice, I strongly support #3. People do not come to me for #1 or #2, and they shouldn't. Checking the third box on the back of the ticket is the only way to have the opportunity to avoid a monetary cost to the State AND to keep your insurance rates reasonable. Often, the cost of hiring me to represent you is much smaller than the potential increase in insurance costs that a driver could face if he or she is found to have committed the infraction. And sometimes, if you choose to have me represent you, you might not even have to come to court, which can save you the expense of taking time off work. In my practice, I can't guarantee that I'll win every time, but I can guarantee that we'll fight hard every time. Before you decide to pay a lot of money to the government and to your insurance company, call me for a free evaluation of your ticket.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Being stopped by a police officer can be a painful and irritating experience. Many people ask me what they should do when they get a ticket. This is an important question for my next post, but first, what should drivers do when they are getting pulled over? First, pull over to a safe place. Nothing annoys a police officer more than a driver who places or even appears to place the officer or others in harm's way. Safely pulling over might actually allow an officer who thought about giving you a warning to do just that and not issue you a citation. If you are in a place where it is very unsafe to pull over, traveling to the next exit and pulling over when it is safe to do so is not a bad idea. Most officers would probably agree that it is reasonable for you to travel a short distance in order for you to safely pull over. Second, once your vehicle is safely stopped, take a deep breath and relax. Do not get out of the vehicle unless ordered by the police officer. Third, when the officer approaches your vehicle, roll down the window. The officer will most likely ask you for your driver's license, registration, and insurance. Often, these documents are not always located in the same place, so assure the officer that if your insurance or registration is in your glove compartment, tell the officer "It's in my glove compartment" so the officer knows why you are going in there. Fourth, don't apologize. The officer might ask you if you know why he or she stopped you. Many people think that you should just say what is on your mind or agree with the officer's reason. DON'T DO THAT! The officer can use your statement against you. If you're uncertain as to the reason of the stop, it is better to not say anything or express uncertainty by saying "I'm not sure, Officer," rather than argue or take a guess. You are not required to implicate yourself. Fifth, if the officer issues you a citation, remove the ticket from your vehicle when you return home and put the ticket in a place where you won't lose it (perhaps under a magnet on your fridge). A traffic ticket is money and you would not misplace your cash, so treat the ticket like cash and don't lose it. You have 15 days from the day the Officer hands you the ticket to send it back (if the ticket is mailed to you, the rules are a little different). Remember, post offices are closed on Sundays, so if you get a ticket on a Saturday or if the post office is closed because of a Monday holiday, you should not wait longer than 14 days to mail your ticket. Waiting longer than the time you are given to send in the ticket can result in you losing your case. Be prompt and you will preserve your opportunity to have a court allow you to fight your ticket. If you have received a citation, please read the next post about the steps you should follow when you get a ticket. Happy driving.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks