ticket for passing on double yellow, not speeding
 

on my motorcycle with at least 3/4 mile visibility. is it worth fighting? its a class C misdemeanor.

i've had no tickets for 11 years. this was on the ducati. total BS, IMO. i'll give full details, if anyone cares.

i am kinda pissed/annoyed/chagrined.

IMO it's not worth fighting because you did break the law. The 'common sense' part of it doesn't really matter to the judge, especially if it's the typical "traffic court revenue-generator" situation.

yeah, i get that. but is it about safety, or about being on a bullet bike? i am sure i'll end up paying the fine. i just don't want it on my record for insurance purposes. like i said, i am not pleased. i can deal with a ticket and take it like a man, if i deserve it, but this was recockulous.

Talk to the prosecutor before you plead and work out a deal. Explain the situation, use pictures if needed. Give him his money, ask for no points. It's not hard.

JR

i just talked to my counselor. he said "plea in abeyance". i end up paying the fine, doing traffic court, but it's not on my record. he also said that IF the court won't accept the "plea in abeyance", take it to trial. this could be fun in a masochistic way.

It's about passing on the double yellow.

there are exceptions to that law. i am looking at them right now.

41-6a-701. Duty to operate vehicle on right side of roadway -- Exceptions.
(1) On all roadways of sufficient width, a person operating a vehicle shall operate the vehicle on the right half of the roadway, except:
(a) when overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the same direction under the rules governing that movement;
(b) when an obstruction requires operating the vehicle to the left of the center of the roadway subject to the provisions of Subsection (2);
(c) on a roadway divided into three marked lanes for traffic under the applicable rules; or
(d) on a roadway designed and signposted for one-way traffic.
(2) A person operating a vehicle shall yield the right-of-way to a vehicle:
(a) traveling in the proper direction on a roadway; and
(b) that is within a distance constituting an immediate hazard.

i am thinking that the vehicle i passed was an obstruction, pursuant to 1b, due to the fact that they were on their cell phone and driving erratically. the man on his cell phone was not constituting an immediate hazard (except to me, and breaking the law) and they were an obstruction, IMO.

You simply cannot cross a double yellow line. I've watched judges ask defendants "If the double yellow line had been a 4-foot high concrete barrier, would you have crossed it?"

Sure, you can cross the center line, if there is an obstruction and if the center line is a dashed yellow line. But if it is a double yellow line, you would brake and stop.

When you say the maneuver was safe, I believe you. But if you crossed a double-yellow line, your action was unlawful.

are we dealing with cement barriers or painted lines? how would a reasonable person react to an obstruction, dangerous, when crossing a double yellow line will alleviate the problem?

I'll confess to an occasional pass on the yellow with a capable motorcycle, but only after a considerable wait for a legal pass. It doesn't take much distance to execute a pass with a bike of any more than modest performance.
Jim

Prosecutors are almost always willing to take a plea to lesser charge (no points) with an enhanced fine.

Good luck with that. The judge won't see it that way, seeing as the officer elected to stop you instead of the "obstruction". Traffic court judges have heard every excuse in the book for motorcyclists passing on double yellows. They see us as reckless and irresponsible for the most part anyway.

It's likely we all do this at times (it's ridiculously easy to do) while posing absolutely no threat to ourselves or anyone else. None of that matters. There seems to be this overblown sense of "fair play" in this country, where motorcycles are not given any allowances for their smaller footprint and much higher performance. We are supposed to pretend we are in a car, or a truck, with their larger size and lesser performance and ride accordingly. No lane splitting (except in California), no weaving around bumper to bumper stalled traffic, and no passing where a clapped out semi truck couldn't pass as well. Judges and cops love to enforce this sense of "fairness" upon motorcyclists.

Even if it was painfully obvious to the cop that what you did was entirely safe and within the bounds of common sense, most will still pop you. That's how they roll. They claim a strict adherence to the law and an inability to exercise independent judgement when it suits them, yet bend the law or turn a blind eye when it suits them in some situations. Motorcyclists very rarely come out on the winning end of this.

Bottom line is, the law may be "wrong", but you did break it knowingly and willingly. That said, this is America - you have every right, perhaps even an obligation, to fight it. I'm convinced we have only come to be burdened by such petty laws and petty enforcement of those laws because so many choose not to fight the charges. If every citizen fought every traffic ticket, we would soon overwhelm our law enforcement officers and court systems. They would then be forced to make the choice between focusing their resources on real crime and real criminals that hurt folks, or basically honest citizens that will likely just roll over and pay. Right now there seems to be far too much emphasis on the latter.

My wife and kids were on the way to town one day and they saw a Vt.Sate trooper pass
a car in a double yellow line area (no blues on). When they got to town the trooper was parked at the mini-mart and when they went inside my daughter(16 at the time)asked him about the
double yellow pass. He told her it's legal to pass on a double yellow if you can do it safely
and not impede on coming traffic.
I just looked it up and it states "passing on a double yellow line is not recommended"

Learn something new every day.

Vermont rules because of this!

I lived in Vermont for ten years and this was a little known fact, but a locally grown buddy clued me in. I rode the wheels off my motorcycle in that state and made liberal use of legally crossing the double yellow.

I did discover that you can get a ticket for "limitations on passing" if you pass 5 cars at one time, but that is another story.

If you do want to fight it (and I say take the ticket and live on...) I think your only hope would be to find out why that particular area is double yellow, and see if it really is...

You deserve your day in court. Talk to a lawyer and if he/she thinks they can get you off, I'd let them try. You don't want a misdemeanor on your record.

Why spend the time and money to paint the lines if everyone's gonna decide to use their own "judgement"? You've already admitted guilt...just pay the fine.

you passed a vehicle by crossing a double yellow line

if it was "just"a ticket, I'd say man up & pay the ticket

"class C misdemeanor" = not good; get an atty who is experienced with traffic ticket stuff; he can no doubt bargain it down to a fine

I agree with P O P & Jeff Higgins above. You DO need a lawyer tho.

"yeah, i get that. but is it about safety, or about being on a bullet bike?"

Maybe they just put the double yellow down when there is a bullet bike coming. :rolleyes:

apparently, ALL traffic tickets in utah are misdemeanors. that way they can issue a warrant if you don't appear/pay.

i'll do the "plea and abeyance" thing. if the court balks, it goes to court, with an attorney.

...Why spend the time and money to paint the lines if everyone's gonna decide to use their own "judgement"? You've already admitted guilt...just pay the fine....

ummm... i am driving the motorcycle. i can and do exercise my judgment, all the time, as to what is safe for me. i think there is even a law that is written to the effect that the "driver is in control of the vehicle," etc.

anyway, i am not crying. it was just silly, as there were cars and other motorcycles traveling well above the posted limit of 55. somehow, this officer, just thought it was my day.

Driving to the coast and back recently on a twisty road I liked, I noticed that many of my old passing straights were now double yellow lines. Plenty of room & visibility for a faster machine to pass...probably not enough room for a Prius to pass.

I discussed this with a friend via email...he explained this change happened nationwide some time ago...new federal edict. (Thank you Joan Claybrook minions).

Of course, any state NOT complying is subject to loss of federal highway funds, so the spray trucks got busy...and ticket revenues increased, I'm sure...

Nanny Government...gotta love it.

ummm... i am driving the motorcycle. i can and do exercise my judgment, all the time, as to what is safe for me.

You may have thought it was safe for you, but you should have thought that it is illegal. Again, you're guilty, just pay the fine. Why do so many people feel the need to not accept the consequences of their willful actions? Sorry if that sounds harsh, but that's the reality of it.

I also enjoyed the fact that Vermont DMV has no reciprocity with its counterpart in Massachusetts. Which is why my buddy and I would ride up in VT instead of NH.

If you wanna dance, you gotta pay the band...........

what roads, Paul?

34

VT is great. NH ain't too bad either.

I can't believe how many folks are saying "just pay the fine".

Seems the modern American has given up. The original pretext behind this great nation was to be one where the government, and the laws it writes, were to serve the people. Now many of you seem entirely accepting of the 180 degree about-face we've experienced in that relationship where today, the people serve the government and the litany of laws it has written.

This case is a great example of where we have arrived. No harm was done. There was no potential to have done any harm. The idea that our government can now drag a citizen into court under such circumstances, and not provide that citizen the benefit of due process (a jury trial, representation, right to appeal, etc.) both saddens and enrages me. The general population's acceptance of this change in our relationship with our government perplexes me. I guess many do not see it as "worth it" to fight the small battles in an effort to reverse this relationship, and to return it to its proper order.

We have, through our laziness and apathy, made it far too easy for our government to badger us with and endless laundry list of nuisance laws. There is now a law to cover just about every aspect of our lives. "Violators" of such petty laws tend to be, for the most part, otherwise fine and upstanding citizens. Men and women who are "too busy", who no longer think it is "worth it" to fight back. They are really just too lazy and apathetic; they have really just given up and have subjected themselves to this over bearing government authority in their lives. The worst part is, since they seem to be the majority, they are dragging those of us who demand better, who demand a return to the proper citizen/government relationship, down with them. Laziness and apathy are carrying the day. How sad.

+1

Never, ever give up your day in court.

I'm all for less government intrusion. The fact is that he willfully broke an existing law. Pay the fine. If he wants to spend his time trying to get the law changed, that's a different issue.

Fight it. If it was on a straight with a clear line of sight, find another similar area (same speed limit, too) and make your case. I agree with JH- if we're not willing to fight the little battles, we may as well put down the keyboards and start grazing in a pasture.

Almost everytime someone balks about a speeding ticket on this board,
folks chime in about how it's a "cost of doing business on your fantastic machine. If you were speeding and you know it, take the lumps and move on."

Why is this different? We all know he did nothing "really" wrong, but he was wrong place, wrong time, wrong cop.

Even though I appreciate the spirit of Jeff's post, he himself has shown with his experiences that the moral high ground has little weight in the court of law. Should nynor give up a few days off of work, to go to the courthouse and end up with the same fine+costs? Sure, if he wants to.

The ghosts of America's great patriots aren't going to help him pay the fine, and they're not going to cover for him at work either.

Fighting each and every such charge leveled against us is how we need to fight this insanity. Clogging up our legal system with each and every citizen fighting each and every petty enforcement of petty laws is the only way we are ever going to reverse this tide. Demonstrate to our government, on a case by case basis, that we are simply not going to take it anymore. Working with them in a cooporative effort, or asking them nicely for our authority back, has not been working. Working to change, or better yet eliminate such useless law on a law-by-law basis will simply not work - it hasn't yet. We have been smothered by too many of them. The only solution at this point is to fight each and every individual case until our courts get so backed up as to cause this current level and nature of enforcement to collapse under its own weight. Make it so our government understands that each and every time it levels a charge against a citizen, we will demand our day in court, and we will demand due process. If it is important enough to charge us, it is important enough to ensure we receive both. If it is not important enough for that, then they need to leave us the hell alone.

+1

Does this make you feel better?:)

Motorcyclist taunts pursuing trooper after crash, says WSP | KING5.com | Seattle Area Local News

What if they build bigger court houses and hire more judges?

So the Fed mandated this so the states would have more revenue?

Not buying that at all.

When it comes to keeping a reign on dicks who tend to think THEY know better than anyone else what is and isn't safe passing i find there is value in SOME nannying.

I LOVE a good spirited drive but crossing double yellows, no matter how conservatively long, is not on the menu.

Sounds like someone is more than happy that "they" have told him how to live his life, down to the finest detail. Perfectly comfortable that "they" don't trust his judgement.

So when "they" decide your, let's say guns, are no longer o.k., are "they" still right? Is anyone who defies their decision and judgement a "jack ass?"

It's precisely this kind of thinking, this unquestioning deference to this notion that "they" always know better that has gotten us into this mess. I'm surprised you can't see that.