Well ISTM that there two possibilities as to the cop’s version.
One is what he told me at the time, i.e. that I should have slowed down and checked things out more carefully. I would think that failure - even assuming that it would have made a difference - might not amount to “failure to yield”.
The other possibility is that he claims that it was obvious at the time that the ambulance was attempting - or at least intending - to cross the street. I would think he would have to make up some details for that, and the question is that while judges tend to accept the cop’s version over the citizen’s, if the cop is making stuff up off the cuff (& probably doesn’t remember the details too well to begin with) how difficult is it to prevail?
39:4-91, failure to yield to an emergency vehicle.
Plea bargain doesn’t help me much. It’s a 2 point ticket and I have a clean record. Meanwhile there’s a mandatory surcharge for any plea bargain in NJ, which I believe is about $240 or more. Not worth it for me.
The question is whether my chances of acquital are worth $33 in court costs plus time wasted, or if I should just mail in the check.
Well I will not make any judgements or render any opinions on one side of the events. Nothing personal. I’ve been backed into a corner (literally) too many times in a social setting hearing about how some asshole cop gave me a ticket and how could he I did nothing wrong. I have had people argue to my face about things they did that I witnessed. And I believed they believed what they were saying. They were just wrong. I was never a big ticket writer. If I gave you a ticket it was pretty blatant.
It’s pretty unlikely that the cop will be making things up. Although I’m sure it’s not the same way you saw it. For traffic tickets you generally see the same judge every week. If you lose your credibility with that judge once you lose it forever. It just isn’t worth it to get a guilty verdict for one ticket. And it may be on tape.
I thought it might be the move over law, 39:4-92.2.
Here’s the story about the surcharge. For years they would use a couple of statutes as a plea bargain all of which had no points. Such as obstructing traffic. Then the state assignment judge decided that wasn’t kosher. He basically said that people were being told to plead guilty to things they didn’t do. If you were speeding you can’t plead guilty to obstructing traffic. So for a while it was very hard to do pleas. Then the legislature made a new statute for driving in an unsafe manner. It was specifically for plea bargains. It worked. Everyone was happy. Then the state realized they could make more money. So they tacked on the surcharge. It has not legal purpose. It was simply a revenue stream for the state and they get 100% of that cash. You will find no lawyer or cop who likes it.
This isn’t universally true in Ohio for a camera ticket. In several cities I’m familiar with, there’s nothing to be arrested for because the ticket is actually not a summons, just a notice that you’re allowed to settle with the city for $X in order to avoid a civil lawsuit for $X+$Y.
I never heard of a stop sign with a camera. Does that mean no cop was involved?
I’d first try to figure out if any points will go on your license. If not, just go ahead and pay the fine. If so, find out if this will affect your insurance rates (generally a lot worse than the fine). If not, I’d still just pay the fine.
If your insurance rates will be adversely affected (and remember, this could be for several years in the future), it might be worth going to court.
I used to live in Suffolk; I got one speeding ticket while living there but didn’t fight it (I did go to court but I didn’t know what I was doing (couldn’t think on my feet). The judge, however, seemed willing to listen to explanations and let people off if he felt they were reasonable). However, I can offer two other anecdotes:
I once got a speeding ticket in Ancram (tiny town in upstate NY). In court, I requested an audience with the prosecutor (actually the cop who pulled me over) and he was willing to reduce the penalty (I think to something like 10 MPH over the limit, less than I was going) if I plead guilty.
The last ticket I got was several years ago in Long Beach, a city in Nassau County. When I went to court, it was pretty much a joke - it was obvious that they were just concerned with getting their money. They let pretty much everyone except DWIs plead to lesser charges (mine went from going straight in a right turn only lane to double-parking, a non-moving violation).
I fear that the OP has been killed by one of the new red light cameras operated by Skynet. Since he hasn’t returned to his thread that’s the only logical conclusion.
An arrest in Ohio requires the offense be at least a Misdemeanor of the 4th degree.
IF it is a MINOR misdemeanor, you can only be arrested under statutory exceptions, one is refusing to sign the citation.
IF the ticket is the UNIFORM TRAFFIC TICKET then it is a Summons. If the payment method is different in a municipality and not a summons, I suppose that is up to them?? Never heard of that though!!
As a magistrate in Ohio I think EH’s experience trumps your research skills. For non-payment of a ticket the offense is contempt of court not the underlying traffic offense.
The only difference here is that the penalty for such a ticket is a civil penalty not fine. However it is administered through the court so non-payment is still contempt of court. I don’t know for certain how it is administered in Ohio but that is how it done here. And I have seen arrest warrants for red light camera tickets.
No just irrelevant to this situation. If you were claiming you can’t get a warrant for not paying a traffic ticket because the ticket in a felony you were wrong. The warrant is actually for contempt of court. If that is not what you were trying to say it was a non sequitur and irrelevant to the discussion at hand.
I guess legally correct to some other question. Irrelevant to the discussion. You can get a warrant for falling to pay a summons. I don’t know what your point is trying to be.
In California there are 2 types of Red light tickets issued. The difference is how clearly the picture identifies the driver of the offending vehicle. If the picture is clear, and the driver is recognizable, you get the normal ticket. That ticket has a date and time to appear in court (or pay the fine). If the picture is NOT clear, as in the driver is not recognizable, then you get the “snitch ticket.” That ticket lacks a date and time to appear, but asks you to identify the driver of the vehicle, or admit it is you. If you respond, they act accordingly. If you ignore the ticket, it sits in limbo for a year, at which time they can no longer prosecute the matter. Do not send the police off looking for Fred Flintstone or some other fictitious driver, as that is an offense in itself. Simply let the snitch ticket sit there for a year and it’s will not be prosecuted. Google red light camera and your state and you’ll see lots of suggestions. Avoid links that promise to fix, or get the ticket dismissed as they are full of it.
An interesting side note. At least two cities in my county have covered the red light cameras. (not yet removed) The reason they have done so is that the data does not support that the intersection with the cameras are any safer than those without them. In fact, there are more rear end accidents reported on intersections with cameras because people are jamming on their breaks and stopping so as not to chance the yellow.
Points taken, Lord Feldon, lawbuff and Loach, and thank you. To clarify:
Cleveland, Ohio (and several of its suburbs) has red light cameras. In Cleveland, if you fail to pay the fine but also don’t contest it, a bench warrant will not issue, and you won’t get points against your license, but the Clerk of Court may and probably will enter a civil judgment against you for the amount of the fine plus a penalty. If you then object, that case is heard by the Court of Common Pleas (the countywide court of general jurisdiction), not by the Cleveland Municipal Court, oddly enough. My understanding is that very few such cases are ever filed in Common Pleas.
For any other traffic offense here, see my post #18.
i got pulled over 10 yrs ago for the same (stop sign - not completely stopping) he gave me a verbal warning, and said it was really important to come to a full stop. So I said I would.
Not long after, I came to a stop in the country. I remembered I gave him my word, waited for car to stop, when I would have normally rolled. Out behind a blind spot of a tree appeared a lady with kids in a tiny green Mini Cooper sized car. Her speed limit was 40. Beyond doubt, I would have pulled into her path had I normally rolled. She was there all along, just hidden in a blind spot for a second or two.
Just for the record, I meant no disrepect to you about posting about Ohio. Your laws are in line with the case that permitted it all, Mendenhall;
If we look at 79.01 of the Akron Ordinance cited in Mendenhall;
A violation for which a civil penalty is imposed under this section is not a moving violation for the purpose of assessing points under Ohio Revised Code Section 4507.021 for moving traffic offenses and may not be recorded on the driving record of the owner of the vehicle and shall not be reported to the Bureau of Motor Vehicles.
E.
Collection of Civil Penalty. If the civil penalty is not paid, the civil penalty imposed under the provisions of this section shall be collectible, together with any interest and penalties thereon, by civil suit pursuant to procedures established by the City of Akron for the collection of debts.
Since the Mendenhall decision was based on this ordinance it was also my understanding no arrest would be made for failure to pay in any community, or it would be outside the crux of Mendenhall.
