Speeding Ticket Question

Factual Questions
21

Not according to the state law.

Sec. 545.352. PRIMA FACIE SPEED LIMITS. (a) A speed in excess of the limits established by Subsection (b) or under another provision of this subchapter is prima facie evidence that the speed is not reasonable and prudent and that the speed is unlawful.

Text of subsec. (b) as amended by Acts 1999, 76th Leg., ch. 663, Sec. 2 and Acts 1999, 76th Leg., ch. 739, Sec. 1

(b) Unless a special hazard exists that requires a slower speed for compliance with Section 545.351(b), the following speeds are lawful:
(1) 30 miles per hour in an urban district on a street other than an alley and 15 miles per hour in an alley;
(2) 70 miles per hour in daytime and 65 miles per hour in nighttime if the vehicle is a passenger car, motorcycle, passenger car or light truck towing a trailer bearing a vessel, as defined by Section 31.003, Parks and Wildlife Code, that is less than 26 feet in length, passenger car or light truck towing a trailer or semitrailer used primarily to transport a motorcycle, or passenger car or light truck towing a trailer or semitrailer designed and used primarily to transport dogs or livestock, on a highway numbered by this state or the United States outside an urban district, including a farm-to-market or ranch-to-market road;
(3) 60 miles per hour in daytime and 55 miles per hour in nighttime if the vehicle is a passenger car or motorcycle on a highway that is outside an urban district and not a highway numbered by this state or the United States;
(4) **60 miles per hour **outside an urban district if a speed limit for the vehicle is not otherwise specified by this section; or
(5) outside an urban district:
(A) 60 miles per hour if the vehicle is a school bus that has passed a commercial motor vehicle inspection under Section 548.201 and is on a highway numbered by the United States or this state, including a farm-to-market road;
(B) 50 miles per hour if the vehicle is a school bus that:
(i) has not passed a commercial motor vehicle inspection under Section 548.201; or
(ii) is traveling on a highway not numbered by the United States or this state; or
(C) 60 miles per hour in daytime and 55 miles per hour in nighttime if the vehicle is a truck, other than a light truck, or if the vehicle is a truck tractor, trailer, or semitrailer, or a vehicle towing a trailer other than a trailer described by Subdivision (2), semitrailer, another motor vehicle or towable recreational

22

I’d seen that. The two things you highlighted specify “outside an urban area,” but (I didn’t explicitly mention this in the thread, I guess) I was inside an urban area, as defined by the law. (An urban area is, if I recall correctly from earlier today, any area within 100 yards of a location where buildings are placed less than ten feet apart. Something like that anyway.)

There’s nothing on that list about what happens “inside an urban area,” which I found puzzling. From elsewhere (I don’t have my notes with me where I am) I have gathered that inside an urban area, it’s either the default or otherwise whatever some local authority has decided.

-FrL-

23

Your factual question is *are these the kind of consideration that ever get speeding tickets dismissed? * whch was answered in post #2. I will say it again. You have a defense. No guarantee it will convince a judge. Your arguement would carry a lot more weight if you weren’t going over the speed limit that you thought was correct.

Improper signage is a valid defense. As I stated earlier you need some evidence such as pictures for it to work.

Bad radar reading is a valid defense. Radar is not inaccurate +/-5mph. That argument won’t work. Most if not all police departments use a checklist to go through the diagnostics of the unit. Generally they are completely accurate or it isn’t working at all. If it was 5mph off it wouldn’t be in service.

Being unfamiliar with the area is not a valid defense.

I am not pulling this out of my ass. I have eleven years of police experience so far. What factual questions were not answered?

24

Get photos of the area on the highway you were driving. Get lots of them and arrange them in order. Keep everything organized. Show the judge you have your poop together. It’s basically the judge’s call, but being brief, to the point, and having your stuff together (offer it as evidence so the bailiff can hand it to the judge, but do not explain each and every photo) can help your case… but be prepared to pay the fine just in case. It may help to point out you were travelling ‘at the same rate of speed as surrounding traffic’… having a guy travelling at 55 mph on a busy highway when everyone else is doing 70-75 mph can actually be a hazard, and you can tell the judge you didn’t want to get rear-ended… but that’s a toss up. Good luck!

25

I wasn’t saying my questions weren’t being answered. Rather, I was pointing out that you (and others) were starting to answer questions that I didn’t ask. This wouldn’t bother me, except that the questions that were being attributed to me were somewhat stupid questions. :wink:

I was making sure you (and others) understood I was not asking the stupid questions you were answering.

-FrL-

26

Yeah, if I did go through with this, my plan was to take a continuous video of the area. Probably would help to break it up into individual photos.

Something I haven’t been sure of is whether after I get convicted anyway and have to pay the same fine, do I still have the drivers ed and/or probation options I have if I just plead guilty over the phone. This probably differs from district to district so I’ll have to just go check.

I have wondered if I should throw that in or not.

-FrL-

27

Amazingly, I actually managed to have a genuine two way exchange about this via email with a member of the Ft Worth police department today.

I had sent off an email not really expecting an answer. To my complete suprise, I did get an answer.

The first reply from this officer showed he had not understood I was in a 60mph zone. He had thought I had gotten a ticket for going 80 in a 70.

I replied correcting the lack of clarity in my first email (slapping myself for good measure for having made such a bonehead mistake in that email). I explaining the whole situation as I have in this thread.

His reply, I quote in its entirity:

Not exactly a full blown conversation, but certainly an exchange which was more than I expected.

-FrL-

28

Well geez, someone else I never expected to respond did respond. This time, its a lawyer who according to his website used to be a prosecutor dealing with, among other things, traffic violations in the Ft Worth courts.

His response is not so happy. Point 2, especially, does not bode well for me.

From the lawyer’s website, it did not appear to me that he works in traffic court anymore, but the last two paragraphs below seems to be fishing for me to ask for representation. I purposefully went looking for legal comments from someone who wouldn’t be trying to buy my business, so I was kind of disappointed by that. Moreover, that fishing expedition puts everything else he said a little to the suspicious side to my mind.

Anyway, here’s what he said:

:

So from point 1, I see (as I already knew) that the laws applicable involve speed limits altered by local authorities, and that they are required to post speed limit signs.

They did post signs, just not in the exact area in which I was driving.

From point 2, I get bad news. The first point is no problem, as I am not claiming ignorance of law. But the second point hits. Apparently, the law here doesn’t care what my state of mind is. The only question is, how fast was my vehicle going and what was the speed limit. Nothing about what I could reasonably have understood the limit to be counts from a legal standpoint.

(I am a little confused by this. What if the local authority hadn’t posted signs? Would I be expected to travel at the speed limit anyway? Or does the posting of signs count, itself, as constituting that the limit is now in effect, meaning if they haven’t posted the signs then the speed limit isn’t in fact altered? Anyway, those are theoretical questions irrelevant to my actual case.)

Based on these two email exchanges, and on what I’ve found on this thread and elsewhere on the web, it looks like the following is the case. First, legally, strictly speaking, I haven’t got a case. Second, in practice, sometimes, some judges act reasonable about these situations nevertheless. And prosecutors tend to bring the fine level down when you go to trial anyway.

I still don’t know whether, if I am found guilty after going to trial, I will still have an option to do drivers ed or probation to clear my record for insurance purposes. Also, the one account I have found online of a prosecutor lowering the fine (this happened to be in Ft Worth as well) involved that prosecutor stipulating that if the fine was lowered, the driver could not do drivers ed. I wonder if that’s likely to happen to me.

Anyway, thanks for all your comments on this thread. It’s very interesting.

-FrL-

29

The other option – if you’re prepared to go to trial anyway – is to talk to the prosecutor beforehand, and see if she’ll drop the charge. If you can’t get an appointment, usually it’s the person calling roll prior to the judge entering.

30

That’s something I’ve considered, though I was afraid it was just a silly idea. I am having trouble tracking down just what office I would need to contact. I guess a simple inquiry with the city attorney’s office would do it.

-FrL-

31

Each and every court across the country runs things a little different. But most that I have heard of run like ours. In our court it would be impossible to take every case to trial. There just isn’t time. After the roll call everyone is given the oppurtunity to talk to the prosecutor. During that time unless there is something seriouly wrong with your driving record he will offer a lesser charge as a plea bargain. Most prosecutors I have worked with will not be interested in your pictures or arguments at this time, they just want to move you along. They usually tell you to take the plea or go to trial so they can move on to the next case. No guarantee that this what is done there but I bet it will be something similar. The first step is usually a plea of not guilty or a request for a court date from the court clerk.

But I like stupid questions. They are the only ones I am qualified to answer.