# lawyer dopers, can a reasonable speed defense actually work? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 12, 2012, 3:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lawyer-dopers-can-a-reasonable-speed-defense-actually-work/627969 "2012-07-12T03:54:22Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 18\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2012, 2:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lawyer-dopers-can-a-reasonable-speed-defense-actually-work/627969/21 "2012-07-13T02:29:30Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > I hope the OP is in California where it might just work. Worked for me- in CA. Mind you the street (PCH) had the speed limit lowered to a crazy low speed (25 MPH) just to gather income for the HBPD, it was 3 AM, and my speed was perfectly legal on either side of Hermosa Beach. (45MPH) In fact, all I had to do was say “Present your honor”, then watch as the judge ripped the cop a new one, and said “Dismissed!”. Thus despite all the “Obey the damn law you scofflaw” BS being spouted off here- in this case the judge clearly thought _the cops_ were the ones violating the law, since as he pointed out, my speed was “perfectly safe”. Mind you, extreme speed is dangerous and needs to be illegal. But speed traps are wrong also. **DrCube** ’s advice may well work. Except- if the OP’s ticket is a not a actual crime as in a misdemeanor, in that it’s a “infraction” then hiring a lawyer is a waste of money. ---
**Author:** ![notsoheavyd3](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/85e7bf/32.png) [@notsoheavyd3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/notsoheavyd3)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2012, 4:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lawyer-dopers-can-a-reasonable-speed-defense-actually-work/627969/22 "2012-07-13T04:00:23Z")
> [@magnusblitz](#): > > You’re absolutely correct in that it’s intended to work in favor of lower speeds (bad conditions = “reasonable speed limit” becomes lower than normal posted limit) but for the converse, I always imagine a scenario such as: you’re on a crowded road. The posted speed limit is 65 mph. Everyone else is going 80 mph. If you don’t go 80 mph, you’ll be slowing down traffic and risking getting rear-ended, etc. Yet you’re still a good 15 mph over the speed limit… seems kinda damned if you do, damned if you don’t. You won’t get a speeding ticket but a cop might well feel like giving you a ticket for obstructing traffic. Sort of the situation here. IE Massachusetts where if you try to obey the speed limit (hey, i tried it the past few days) you always get tailgated. Let me tell you having a semi 10-15 feet behind you actually feels dangerous unlike speeding on the highway when you don’t have anybody around you. (Which in my case makes it fairly easy to argue they targeted my car correctly.) ---
**Author:** ![notsoheavyd3](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/85e7bf/32.png) [@notsoheavyd3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/notsoheavyd3)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2012, 4:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lawyer-dopers-can-a-reasonable-speed-defense-actually-work/627969/23 "2012-07-13T04:08:27Z")
> [@DirkGntly](#): > > I am always amused at the cops at the BOTTOM of a hill, taking radar readings. If the objective is ENFORCEMENT and not REVENUE ENHANCEMENT, then why aren’t they taking readings at the TOP OF THE DAMN HILL?? Oh I blame sloth in this case, they just go up on the highway near the barracks. (Wish I knew the barracks were right there.) ---
**Author:** ![notsoheavyd3](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/85e7bf/32.png) [@notsoheavyd3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/notsoheavyd3)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2012, 4:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lawyer-dopers-can-a-reasonable-speed-defense-actually-work/627969/24 "2012-07-13T04:14:46Z")
> [@DrCube](#): > > From what I understand, it is remarkably easy to beat a speeding ticket. > > Just show up in court. Most of the time, the officer has better things to do than spend half his day in court and you’ll win by default. If they show up, there’s a good chance their radar gun hadn’t been calibrated recently enough, or the officer didn’t have his radar refresher course recently enough, or something. What I’m saying is, chances are, if you challenge a speeding ticket you will win. > > HOWEVER, if you represent yourself you have a fool for a client. And a fool for an attorney. So the cost of fighting the ticket very well might exceed the savings. Unless you are trying to keep a spotless driving record or something. I guess it’s worth looking into. Actually it was a laser unit, no idea how often those need to be calibrated. Oh I hear here the state troopers can use a representative so it’s rare for them to not show up. (Oh and it’s civil infraction fwiw.) ---
**Author:** ![GreasyJack](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/df705f/32.png) [@GreasyJack](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GreasyJack)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2012, 4:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lawyer-dopers-can-a-reasonable-speed-defense-actually-work/627969/25 "2012-07-13T04:36:16Z")
> [@DrCube](#): > > From what I understand, it is remarkably easy to beat a speeding ticket. > > Just show up in court. Most of the time, the officer has better things to do than spend half his day in court and you’ll win by default. If they show up, there’s a good chance their radar gun hadn’t been calibrated recently enough, or the officer didn’t have his radar refresher course recently enough, or something. What I’m saying is, chances are, if you challenge a speeding ticket you will win. > > HOWEVER, if you represent yourself you have a fool for a client. And a fool for an attorney. So the cost of fighting the ticket very well might exceed the savings. Unless you are trying to keep a spotless driving record or something. This really, really depends on the state and even which local court you’re in. There’s some where the process is “streamlined” so the cop doesn’t even need to show up and most discrepancies are hand-waved away. In practice, it’s pretty much impossible to outright defeat a ticket, although the judge may give you some sort of deal on points, etc. On the other hand there’s some states where challenging a ticket is actually like a mini-trial, where you show up and plead not guilty but then have to meet with the prosecutor, make discovery, and then come back later for the actual trial. My state is more like the latter, and you can even get a jury trial, although you’re held responsible for the costs if you lose\*. It’s a lot easier to win, but not really worth the trouble. A lot of other states are somewhere in the middle, but I don’t think there’s that many where you have a good chance of actually beating a ticket simply by showing up. \*Side story-- one of the many radical militia groups that flourished in NW Montana and Northern Idaho during the Clinton years was undone when the founder demanded a jury trial for a $20 speeding ticket, presented some sort of malarkey about how the federally-imposed speed limits were illegal, lost, and then ended up getting arrested as a result of not paying all the court costs for the trial. Ironically, right about at the time he was getting locked up, Montana indeed did unshackle itself from those big-government speed limit rules and had its brief “reasonable and prudent” period. ---
**Author:** ![Max\_Torque](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e9bcb4/32.png) [@Max\_Torque](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_Torque)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2012, 2:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lawyer-dopers-can-a-reasonable-speed-defense-actually-work/627969/26 "2012-07-13T14:25:44Z")
If it comes down to it, you can always ask the prosecuting attorney for a “deferred disposition”. Basically, you pay some money to be supervised, and as long as you don’t get any more tickets within, say, 90 days, your ticket is dismissed. It’s not always cheaper than just paying the ticket outright, but you won’t have points or the insurance consequences. ---
**Author:** ![lawbuff](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/13edae/32.png) [@lawbuff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lawbuff)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2012, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lawyer-dopers-can-a-reasonable-speed-defense-actually-work/627969/27 "2012-07-18T19:29:24Z")
> [@notsoheavyd3](#): > > Not sure if this would be considered a “great debate” question or a general question. Anyway you could file this under “So you got a speeding ticket” under MPSIMS. So yes I got a speeding ticket recently. I was reading that sometimes the defense of “My speed was reasonable given the situation” sometimes works. Is this one of those long shot defenses and I’d have better luck with another line of defense? I do not have the case in my head, but could find it with some library research, the Ohio Supreme Court has ruled that while exceeding the posted limit is a prima facie violation, and provides probable cause for an arrest or citation, the officer must prove that the excess speed was in fact UNreasonable for the conditions to gain a conviction. Of course the court is the arbiter. So at least in Ohio, while not a defense to an initial seizure, one can argue it in court. ---
**Author:** ![lawbuff](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/13edae/32.png) [@lawbuff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lawbuff)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2012, 7:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lawyer-dopers-can-a-reasonable-speed-defense-actually-work/627969/28 "2012-07-18T19:36:18Z")
> [@lawbuff](#): > > … the officer must prove that the excess speed was in fact UNreasonable for the conditions to gain a conviction. Of course the court is the arbiter. Let me correct that. The DRIVER must prove it. ---
**Author:** ![lawbuff](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/13edae/32.png) [@lawbuff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lawbuff)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2012, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lawyer-dopers-can-a-reasonable-speed-defense-actually-work/627969/29 "2012-07-18T19:46:22Z")
This is the case, I got lucky online. VILLAGE OF BELLVILLE, APPELLEE, v. KIEFFABER, APPELLANT. Cite as Bellville v. Kieffaber, 114 Ohio St.3d 124, 2007-Ohio-3763. Criminal law — Municipal ordinance — Traffic regulations — Citation for speeding that contains notice of both the prima facie offense and the basic facts supporting that charge includes all the necessary elements of the offense even if the citation does not also allege that the speed is unreasonable for existing condition — **Driver may rebut or negate the prima facie case with evidence that the speed was neither excessive nor unreasonable.** * * * SYLLABUS OF THE COURT A citation for speeding that contains notice of both the prima facie offense and the basic facts supporting the charge includes all the necessary elements of the offense even if the citation does not also allege that the speed is unreasonable for existing conditions. The driver may rebut or negate the prima facie case with evidence that the speed was neither excessive nor unreasonable. (Cleveland v. Keah (1952), 157 Ohio St. 331, 47 O.O. 195, 105 N.E.2d 402, approved and followed.) So, by permitting this DEFENSE, the OSC has ruled that a defacto prima facie violation is not always fatal for the driver. ---
**Author:** ![Doctor\_Who](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ed8c4c/32.png) [@Doctor\_Who](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Doctor_Who)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2012, 7:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lawyer-dopers-can-a-reasonable-speed-defense-actually-work/627969/30 "2012-07-18T19:48:37Z")
Obviously this whole issue is state-specific, but let’s turn back to California. Here are two relevant statutes: > [@](#): > > California Vehicle Code 22350. No person shall drive a vehicle upon a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable or prudent having due regard for weather, visibility, the traffic on, and the surface and width of, the highway, and in no event at a speed which endangers the safety of persons or property. > [@](#): > > California Vehicle Code 22349. (a) Except as provided in Section 22356, no person may drive a vehicle upon a highway at a speed greater than 65 miles per hour. 22350 is affectionately called the “Basic Speed Law”. It gets cited when the officer can articulate you are driving too fast under the specific conditions. This is the law that gets cited when you are speeding through a school zone, or reading a book while you drive, or going 55 in a 35 in town. If you show up in court, the officer has to prove why you were driving at an unreasonable speed under the circumstances. Obviously, in this case, arguing that you were driving at a reasonable speed is perfectly valid (and might even be persuasive, i.e. raise a reasonable doubt). Now, compare that with 22349(a). This is the section that gets cited on the freeways. All that is required for a violation is that you were driving more than 65 miles an hour. Typically this gets proved with radar/laser or pacing. In that case, showing up and arguing that you were driving over 65 but it was reasonable under the circumstances… that’s not a defense, that’s a confession and will be treated as such. ---
**Author:** ![Strassia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e8c25b/32.png) [@Strassia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Strassia)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2012, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lawyer-dopers-can-a-reasonable-speed-defense-actually-work/627969/31 "2012-07-18T19:57:12Z")
> [@DrCube](#): > > From what I understand, it is remarkably easy to beat a speeding ticket. > > Just show up in court. Most of the time, the officer has better things to do than spend half his day in court and you’ll win by default. If they show up, there’s a good chance their radar gun hadn’t been calibrated recently enough, or the officer didn’t have his radar refresher course recently enough, or something. What I’m saying is, chances are, if you challenge a speeding ticket you will win. > > HOWEVER, if you represent yourself you have a fool for a client. And a fool for an attorney. So the cost of fighting the ticket very well might exceed the savings. Unless you are trying to keep a spotless driving record or something. AS others have said, that is highly depend on location. I have tried to fight two tickets, one in upstate New York, and one in Honolulu. Neither went all that well. In NY, the ticket was issued by park rangers at a (locally) known speed trap (major road that went through a park and speed limit drops about 20mph as you cross an intersection). Despite the fact that the judge clearly hated the park rangers, they did not need to show up, and he could not dismiss it. He did give me the smallest allowed fine, but he did that for every ticket issued by them. In Honolulu, it was not speeding but a red a light violation. It was during a downpour and I had a witness that due to standing water I could not stop in time. The officer did not show, the judge did not allow witnesses, and he dismissed my defense with the comment that the ticket did not mention rain, so it must not have been raining. Result was I had to pay the full fine, plus court fees for about $180 more than if I had just paid the fine. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2012, 12:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lawyer-dopers-can-a-reasonable-speed-defense-actually-work/627969/32 "2012-07-19T00:27:46Z")
It wasn’t due to standing water that you couldn’t stop in time. It was because you were going too quickly given the presence of standing water. ---
**Author:** ![scabpicker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/scabpicker/32/8268_2.png) [@scabpicker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scabpicker)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2012, 2:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lawyer-dopers-can-a-reasonable-speed-defense-actually-work/627969/33 "2012-07-19T02:02:40Z")
> [@Max\_Torque](#): > > If it comes down to it, you can always ask the prosecuting attorney for a “deferred disposition”. Basically, you pay some money to be supervised, and as long as you don’t get any more tickets within, say, 90 days, your ticket is dismissed. It’s not always cheaper than just paying the ticket outright, but you won’t have points or the insurance consequences. As a habitual speeder in TX, I can say this is the best that you can really hope for here. Your state may be different. Before the points system was adopted, I just paid the full fine, and went on my way. I only get tickets every 2 years or so, so the probationary period is really a non-issue. But my points would probably add up mightily if the “deferred disposition” system didn’t exist. By and large, I think that “knowing” your speed isn’t unreasonable under the circumstances isn’t going to be an effective defense. Going 90 in my car, with an alert me at the wheel, in clear weather, with no traffic probably isn’t more dangerous than the same situation at 65. My mother in my car, or me in my mother’s car is a different set of circumstances, and 90 would be taking terrible risks. Either way, if nabbed for speeding, I knew what the limit was. I pay the fine, so I can least be an honest miscreant. ---
**Author:** ![ScarletNumber](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c0e974/32.png) [@ScarletNumber](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ScarletNumber)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2012, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lawyer-dopers-can-a-reasonable-speed-defense-actually-work/627969/34 "2012-07-19T21:37:46Z")
> [@magnusblitz](#): > > You won’t get a speeding ticket but a cop might well feel like giving you a ticket for obstructing traffic. This is absurd. You will NEVER get a ticket for driving at or just below the speed limit. As an aside, a doctor was pulled over for speeding on a toll road on a sunday morning driving to the hospital in response to an emergency. The judge found him guilty anyway. ---
**Author:** ![Untoward\_Parable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/51bf81/32.png) [@Untoward\_Parable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Untoward_Parable)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2012, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lawyer-dopers-can-a-reasonable-speed-defense-actually-work/627969/35 "2012-07-19T21:50:46Z")
On freeways the speed limit should be 80 just about everywhere, its just 65 so they can add revenue to the department at will, which should be criminal but hey people need to get involved in politics to change this stuff and we generally don’t for whatever reason. It’s just an annoying scam but hey we get the government we deserve and that’s that. ---
**Author:** ![Victor\_Charlie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/7ea924/32.png) [@Victor\_Charlie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Victor_Charlie)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2012, 9:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lawyer-dopers-can-a-reasonable-speed-defense-actually-work/627969/36 "2012-07-19T21:55:32Z")
We’re well past the Basic Rule days where drivers had some discretion in determining a safe speed for their driving. Depending on the officer or judge, an experienced driver with good vision and a well-maintained car in good driving conditions could argue that he was entitled to drive faster on the same stretch of road than an older person driving on bald tires on a rainy day. ---
**Author:** ![Victor\_Charlie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/7ea924/32.png) [@Victor\_Charlie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Victor_Charlie)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2012, 10:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lawyer-dopers-can-a-reasonable-speed-defense-actually-work/627969/37 "2012-07-19T22:44:32Z")
> [@Untoward\_Parable](#): > > On freeways the speed limit should be 80 just about everywhere, its just 65 so they can add revenue to the department at will, which should be criminal but hey people need to get involved in politics to change this stuff and we generally don’t for whatever reason. It’s just an annoying scam but hey we get the government we deserve and that’s that. And if it were 80 some people would be saying the only reason it’s not 95 is so police can add revenue. There are actually few freeways where having everyone driving 80 would be reasonably safe… certainly not anywhere near even a modestly-sized city. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2012, 3:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lawyer-dopers-can-a-reasonable-speed-defense-actually-work/627969/38 "2012-07-20T03:20:36Z")
> [@ScarletNumber](#): > > This is absurd. You will NEVER get a ticket for driving at or just below the speed limit. This has happened quite a few times right here in CA. Mostly, it when you drive too slow in a left lane. If you’re in the far right lane, you generally are OK, unless you’re REALLY slow. If you are going to speed limit, but on a one lane road (each way) and there are turn-outs and signs “slow traffic yield” or "slow traffic use turn-outs’ and you get more than 5 cars backed up behind you, you can & will get ticketed, speed limit or no. > **[Can You Get a Ticket for Driving Too Slow?](http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/free-books/beat-ticket-book/chapter7-6.html)** > > Traffic violations related to blocking or impeding traffic by not pulling over or driving fast enough. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lawyer-dopers-can-a-reasonable-speed-defense-actually-work/627969.md?page=1)