Are speed traps illegal?

[timmy]

I got another fucking speeding ticket ...I got pulled over for driving 65 in a 50 mph zone by a cop just chillin' on the shoulder and pointing his radar at cars to catch people speeding...I asked dude to cut me some slack and he's like, "this is a special operation, I'm sorry, I can't let you off with a warning"...Fuckin piece of shit. I remember hearing somewhere that speed traps were illegal? How true is this and how much of a chance do I have of fighting this ticket succesfuly with that as my primary excuse? I recently convinced a judge that I was driving in the car pool lane to avoid an accident and had that ($1000) ticket waived off...But I really don't know what I can say to avoid the fine of this ticket? I still have one stop sign ticket that I need to pay and 2 parking tickets.


Would you pay these tickets or would you fight any of them? And does anyone have any info regarding speed traps being illegal? Any opinions would be appreciated...PeACe

Dont go 65 in 50 zone! 

[es-jay]

why fight it. you were driving over the speed limit, a cop spotted you, gave you a ticket, get over it. pay it and move on...

Why fight it? Hmmmm...I never thought of that one.



Just maybe to save money, I guess?

if ya wanna save money, drive slower... when cops are around

[J @ M @ L]

CALIFORNIA VEHICLE CODE SECTION:

40801. No peace officer or other person shall use a speed trap in arresting, or participating or assisting in the arrest of, any person for any alleged violation of this code nor shall any speed trap be used in securing evidence as to the speed of any vehicle for the purpose of an arrest or prosecution under this code.

40802. (a) A speed trap is either of the following:

    (1) A particular section of a highway measured as to distance and with boundaries marked, designated, or otherwise determined in order that the speed of a vehicle may be calculated by securing the time it takes the vehicle to travel the known distance.

    (2) A particular section of a highway with a prima facie speed limit that is provided by this code or by local ordinance under subparagraph (A) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 22352, or established under Section 22354, 22357, 22358, or 22358.3, if that prima facie speed limit is not justified by an engineering and traffic survey conducted within five years prior to the date of the alleged violation, and enforcement of the speed limit involves the use of radar or any other electronic device that measures the speed of moving objects. This paragraph does not apply to a local street, road, or school zone.

(b)

    (1) For purposes of this section, a local street or road is defined by the latest functional usage and federal-aid system maps submitted to the federal Highway Administration, except that when these maps have not been submitted, or when the street or road is not
    shown on the maps, a "local street or road" means a street or road that primarily provides access to abutting residential property and meets the following three conditions:

        (A) Roadway width of not more than 40 feet.

        (B) Not more than one-half of a mile of uninterrupted length. Interruptions shall include official traffic control devices as defined in Section 445.

        (C) Not more than one traffic lane in each direction.

    (2) For purposes of this section "School zone" means that area of
    road contiguous to a school building or the grounds thereof, and on
    which is posted a standard "SCHOOL" warning sign, while children are
    going to or leaving the school either during school hours or during
    the noon recess period.

(c)

    (1) When all the following criteria are met, paragraph (2) of this subdivision shall be applicable and subdivision (a) shall not be applicable:

        (A) When radar is used, the officer issuing the citation has successfully completed a radar operator course of not less than 24 hours on the use of police traffic radar, and the course was approved and certified by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training.

        (B) When laser or any other electronic device is used to measure the speed of moving objects, the officer issuing the notice to appear 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.

        (C)

            (i) The prosecution proved that the officer complied with subparagraphs (A) and (B) and that an engineering and traffic survey has been conducted in accordance with subparagraph (B) of paragraph (2). The prosecution proved that, prior to the officer issuing the notice to appear, the officer established that the radar, laser, or other electronic device conformed to the requirements of subparagraph (D).

            (ii) The prosecution proved the speed of the accused was unsafe for the conditions present at the time of alleged violation unless the citation was for a violation of Section 22349, 22356, or 22406.

        (D) 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.

    (2) A "speed trap" is either of the following:

        (A) A particular section of a highway measured as to distance and with boundaries marked, designated, or otherwise determined in order that the speed of a vehicle may be calculated by securing the time it takes the vehicle to travel the known distance.

        (B)

            (i) A particular section of a highway or state highway with a prima facie speed limit that is provided by this code or by local ordinance under subparagraph (A) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 22352, or established under Section 22354, 22357, 22358, or 22358.3, if that prima facie speed limit is not justified by an engineering and traffic survey conducted within one of the following time periods, prior to the date of the alleged violation, and enforcement of the speed limit involves the use of radar or any other electronic device that measures the speed of moving objects:

                (I) Except as specified in subclause (II), seven years.
                (II) If an engineering and traffic survey was conducted more than seven years prior to the date of the alleged violation, and a registered engineer evaluates the section of the highway and determines that no significant changes in roadway or traffic conditions have occurred, including, but not limited to, changes in adjoining property or land use, roadway width, or traffic volume, 10 years.

            (ii) This subparagraph does not apply to a local street, road, or school zone.


40803. (a) No evidence as to the speed of a vehicle upon a highway shall be admitted in any court upon the trial of any person in any prosecution under this code upon a charge involving the speed of a vehicle when the evidence is based upon or obtained from or by the maintenance or use of a speed trap.

(b) In any prosecution under this code of a charge involving the speed of a vehicle, where enforcement involves the use of radar or other electronic devices which measure the speed of moving objects, the prosecution shall establish, as part of its prima facie case, that the evidence or testimony presented is not based upon a speed trap as defined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 40802.

(c) When a traffic and engineering survey is required pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 40802, evidence that a traffic and engineering survey has been conducted within five years of the date of the alleged violation or evidence that the offense was committed on a local street or road as defined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 40802 shall constitute a prima facie case that the evidence or testimony is not based upon a speed trap as defined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 40802.

40804. (a) In any prosecution under this code upon a charge involving the speed of a vehicle, any officer or other person shall be incompetent as a witness if the testimony is based upon or obtained from or by the maintenance or use of a speed trap.

(b) Every officer arresting, or participating or assisting in the arrest of, a person so charged while on duty for the exclusive or main purpose of enforcing the provisions of Divisions 10 and 11 is incompetent as a witness if at the time of such arrest he was not wearing a distinctive uniform, or was using a motor vehicle not painted the distinctive color specified by the commissioner. This section does not apply to an officer assigned exclusively to the duty of investigating and securing evidence in reference to any theft of a vehicle or failure of a person to stop in the event of an accident or violation of Section 23109 or in reference to any felony charge or to any officer engaged in serving any warrant when the officer is not engaged in patrolling the highways for the purpose of enforcing the traffic laws.

40805. Every court shall be without jurisdiction to render a judgment of conviction against any person for a violation of this code involving the speed of a vehicle if the court admits any evidence or testimony secured in violation of, or which is inadmissible under this article.

[Now_Im_Not_Banned]

^^So you think the speed trap argument will hold up in court? I was driving on Burbank, so it's not considered a highway...

[Twentytwofifty]

I didn't read that whole part of the code that JML posted but I find it hard to believe that a police officer using a radar gun to catch motorists is not legal.  Why would they have speeding laws if you can't enforce them?

[Bay Area Jat]

fuck it fight the ticket.

[J @ M @ L]

Simply using a radar isn't considered a "speed trap"... the definition and all its technicalities are outlined up there... either way, it's dumb not to fight a ticket... cuz you can always ask in court to have your fine reduced and/or request traffic school (if you're not eligible for it... it will just be 12 hours instead of

[Fuck Your Existence]

either way, it's dumb not to fight a ticket... cuz you can always ask in court to have your fine reduced and/or request traffic school

word,ive had a gang of fines reduced/dismissed just for showing up...it all depends on the judge..ive bullshitted my way out of alot of things dude...fight it

[J$crILLa]

dont speed....

lean bacc and ride 5 under the speed limit str8 pimpin homie

[jeromechickenbone]

Just be happy you don't live in Scottsdale.  They have cameras on the highway and at major intersections.  If you are going more than 10 over or run a red light, you'll see a flash and you'll get a ticket in the mail. 

[Now_Im_Not_Banned]

I bet I'll just get it reduced, unless the judge is super cool and waives it off.. I'm thinking of saying some dude was tailgating me and I had to speed up to switch lanes or some shit...You think it would be better to ask the judge to reduce it/waive it, or go fight it in court against the cop (if he shows up)?

[The Watcher]

Just be happy you don't live in Scottsdale.  They have cameras on the highway and at major intersections.  If you are going more than 10 over or run a red light, you'll see a flash and you'll get a ticket in the mail. 

it's the same where i live, except its in like 75% of ALL intersections, so you can't speed up to go through the amber light

i've had a friend i work with contest a speeding ticket 3 times in court, and all 3 times the cops have showed up

[Now_Im_Not_Banned]

^^You can either contest it in court or ask the judge to reduce/waive the fine (with a good excuse)...I'm probably going with the latter.


My girl got a ticket in the mail for failing to stop at a red light...They have cameras here in some intersections, but you never know which ones.

[Suga Foot]

We got intersection cameras here too.  We used to have photo radar too.  There would be a van parked on the side of the road, and it would just snap pictures of people speeding.  But they got rid of those because it was entrapment. 

[Twentytwofifty]

We got intersection cameras here too.  We used to have photo radar too.  There would be a van parked on the side of the road, and it would just snap pictures of people speeding.  But they got rid of those because it was entrapment.

That could not have been the case.  I cannot see how that is entrapment.  Entrapment occurs whenever a police officer or other government agent deceives an innocent person into committing a crime he or she had no prior intention of committing.