Any California traffic law ex[erts out there?

I am apparently irresistable to the CHP.

In my ongoing quest to lose my driving privileges in this state, I got cited today for "not wearing a seatbelt." I put that in quotes because... for the first time in my life... I'm not guilty of what I've been cited for (or anything else, on this particular drive). I was wearing my seatbelt, which was the first thing the ticketing officer noticed once he'd pulled me over. He immediately informed me that he had seen me without one on, and that I must have just put it on.

Normally, if pulled over while not wearing a belt, I probably would put it on in the hopes the officer wouldn't add that to the ticket. But in this case, I'd been wearing my belt since I left my house (track driving has taught me to do this pretty diligently, and my seatbelt warning buzzer is broken in a way that makes it much louder than normal). People always try and wiggle out of tickets on the basis of special circumstances, the officer's bad attitude, or the circumstances being safe for violating the law. I always accept it. I've never challenged a ticket in my life. I think the decision to speed or change lanes without signaling, or rolling a stop sign is something that -- if you've done it -- you have to take responsibility for (and I do... again and again).

But this time I was simply not guilty. The guy was polite, but he also made it clear that he wanted no argument from me. I didn't give him one.

But I was wearing my belt. The black belt was on my black shirt in my black car. I don't see how he could have seen it not being on me, even if it wasn't. But it was on me.

As you can probably tell, this is still fresh for me. I'm irritated.

Two questions, though, for any guys with legal smarts. Is this a 'points' violation? If it isn't, I'll probably let injustice be served and save myself a day in court. If it is (which I suspect is the case), then what's the best way to present my case? Has anyone here done this?

There were no passengers. I'd been on the cell phone with my girlfriend until I saw him pull behind me, when I hung up. I thought he was pulling me over to lecture me for that. No such luck.

Obviously, it's his word against mine. He couldn't have seen me put the belt on while driving or pulling over (because I didn't), and he didn't suggest that he had seen me. As I said, he noted that it was on me when he asked for my license and registration.

Any suggestions?

------------------
Jack Olsen
1973 911 T (3.6) sunroof coupe
jackolsen@mediaone.net

[This message has been edited by JackOlsen (edited 05-08-2001).]

Originally posted by JackOlsen:
Two questions, though, for any guys with legal smarts. Is this a 'points' violation? If it isn't, I'll let injustice be served and save myself a day in court. If it isn't (which I suspect is the case), then what's the best way to present my case? Has anyone here done this?

Jack, I think you mean if this isn't a moving violation, you won't challenge it in court. Correct? You said "isn't" for both cases.

I can't speak for California, but in Arizona this isn't a moving violation. In fact a police officer CANNOT even pull you over for not having your seat belt on. They must pull you over for a different reason and can cite you for not having a belt on.

Good luck.


------------------
1988 black on black Coupe
www.cheaterswayside.com/911/gallery.asp?sort=0&userid=339

Thanks. I fixed the grammar error.

In California, since 1993, they can pull you over just for the belts. Incidentally, it's a law I support. (But again... I was wearing my belt! )

Jack, Heard of the crime of "driving while black?" I've driven P cars since 1966. The ONLY tickets I've received? Not on a motorcyle, not in a pickup, nothing else...just the P car, my only tickets. Welcome to one of the prices of ownership.

I got pulled over in my 944 in the late 80's for doing about 8-10 over the speed limit. The officer seemed like an ok guy so I popped the question, "Does this ticket have anything to do with the car I am driving?" His reply, "Most Definitely." So there you have it straight from the horses mouth. I guess it's the price you pay for appreciating fine cars.

Dante Oliverio

I am not sure about Cal, but it should not be a moving violation. Here in SC, they can pull you over for not wearing your belt.

Think of it, you were lucky. There was a lady who did not have her belt on. The cop arrested her in front of her children and took her to jail. This was a recent supreme court case. It was 5 to 4 ruling that support the police action. I am sure you don't have any friends in jail, and I am sure you don't want to make any there either.

The policeman has made a mistake. You might want to talk to him prior to the court date and see if you two can settle the matter.

Good Luck.

Jack, first thing you need to find out is how close you are to losing your license on points. If this ticket will send you over the points limit, get an attorney who handles traffic cases. They know the prosecutors and the judges. They are also better educated and equipped to take your case to trial. If you aren't going to exceed your points limit and want to have a go at doing it yourself, check out this online manual called "How to beat a speeding ticket." by my friend Norman Fernandez, an attorney in L.A. http://www.norman-law.com/page12.html I know your ticket is for seatbelts, by his book is a great primer for anyone who wants to try their own case. If you have anymore questions, just ask.

Kurt V
72 911E

C'mon Jack, you're obviously trying to wiggle out of it. You're lying you slipped the belt on didn't you? Fess up and pay the ticket and you'll feel better already.

Just talked to my brother, who is a San Diego cop. He said you should go to court and see what happens, but it is likely the cop won't remember you. Go through the link above, there is some good information there. Write down as much as you can about what happened today, so you can refer to it later.

He also said that seat belts don't count toward your license.

Tom

Jack:
I don't know if it's a moving violation or not, but Kurt is right. An attorney would be the way to go. Even if you appear in court by yourself, you have a good chance of beating it, especially if you explain your philosophy about seat belts. The fact that you track the car could demonstrate your safety awareness. Take some pictures of the car, seat & belts & you in the car dressed like you were. Tell the court it's a bonified mistake on the cop's part. Half of the time the police don't even show up in court & you win the judgement by default, especially if you get it delayed as many times as you can. But, an attorney would definitely help increase your chances of winning.

------------------
Marv Evans
'72 911E

He also said that seat belts don't count toward your license.

If it doesn't give me a point, then I'll go in and fight it on my own. If it does give me a point, I'll write a check to somebody good and cross my fingers. I believe I'm two points away from losing the license, which is to say I've had three tickets in the past 12 months, one of which was disposed of by traffic school.

------------------
Jack Olsen
1973 911 T (3.6) sunroof coupe
jackolsen@mediaone.net

Jack, I would go to court, but you need to play shrink with the hearing clerk. Let the officer tell his version; then, quite sincerely, you tell the clerk that "the officer was MISTAKEN" (then describe your manner of dress - dark clothing - and your faithful adherance to the seatbelt law, blah, blah, blah). This does a few things: you avoid calling the cop an outright liar to his face, he still gets his O.T./courtroom stipend (which is the only reason he tagged you), and you look like a good citizen who supports his local police, but nonetheless is righteous. Done this before, works well... And wear your dark clothes to court. Good luck.

Originally posted by MarkY:
Jack, I think you mean if this isn't a moving violation, you won't challenge it in court. Correct? You said "isn't" for both cases.

I can't speak for California, but in Arizona this isn't a moving violation. In fact a police officer CANNOT even pull you over for not having your seat belt on. They must pull you over for a different reason and can cite you for not having a belt on.

Good luck.

Jack, go to court. First see if the cop shows. Second watch how the judge is acting. If he is hammering everyone, then you know you need a plan B. If this is looking bad ask for a continuance to get counsel. Then sit back and let your attorney and the prosecutor work it out. Last make friends at city hall or the PD. Think like a chicago boy, a few friends in the right places and there isn't much you can do to get in trouble. They may kick your ass if you cause them trouble, but that's not a bad price to pay. Good luck
david

First of all, If the police officer already is working during your court time it is not overtime. he gets paid whether he's sitting in traffic court or out writing tickets/patroling. If he is scheduled off, well then it is overtime. FYI, to most cops it is not worth the little overtime you get to come in to court for a traffic ticket on their day off.

Second, to say it makes a differance what car you drive is a general statement and not true, at least in regards to speeding tickets. I dont know one police officer who has a itch for a particular kind of car.

Third, the judge is not going to issue a continuance. basically you decide if you want to fight the ticket and then they supeana the officer to court. On that day either you show up with an attorney or you dont. If you dont have one on that day the judge is not going to issue a continuance for a infraction.


Fourth, talking to the officer outside the courtroom is not gonna work and the clerk inside the courtroom has nothing to do with whether you get the ticket or not.

I've read on this board numerous times different peoples experiances and advice when dealing with the police and have not said a word. Well, as a Police Officer in Los Angeles, alot of you guys do not know what you are talking about.

Jack my advice to you as a Police Officer (Actually as a Deputy Sheriff who has written tickets on the freeways as well as city streets. FYI, Some people think that Deputy Sheriff's can't write a ticket on the freeway or in another city. That would be incorrect. As a Los Angeles County Sheriff. If it's in the county of Los Angeles it is in my jurisdiction.)

Anyway my advice would be to have pictures of you taken in your car with the clothing you were wearing and your seatbelt on at varying distances and angles. Then take the same pictures while not wearing the seatbelt.(hopefully the pictures turn out well) Take these pictures to court. When you go to court, the officer will tell his side of the story first. then you will be able to ask him questions based on his statements and then you get to give your side of the story. When you Question the Officer, Ask him how far away he was when he first saw you driving with what appeared to be no seat belts. he will probably say one to two car lenghts.then you tell your account of the situation(this should include when you saw the police officer and your actions prior to being stopped) at the end of your statement, pull out both sets of pictures. hopefully they should show how dificult it is to tell if your wearing your seatbelt or not.Don't try to play any tricks with the pictures, just show the police officer the pictures, than have the baliff give them to the judge. then tell the judge that you believe that due to the fact that the color of your car is black, that the shirt you were wearing at the time is black (if it's a presentable shirt wear it in court) and that the interior of your car as well as your seatbelt are black you feel the officer made an honest mistake in thinking that you were not wearing your seatbelts. Tell him you wear your seatbelt when your drive and that that day was no exception. Thats it. There is no need to hire an attorney for a seatbelt ticket. Just present your case in a polite courteous manner and give the judge the facts and some doubt(pictures) and you will probably be fine.

So in Cali the police have to show in court. Hopefully your lucky there. In Washington the police don't have to show for tickets. The ticket and whatever notes written along with it are their sworn testimony.

Any way I'd do what the others have said. Have pictures taken, be courtious and concise and hope for the best.

------------------
Gunter
'82 SC Targa

Jack, taking pictures is an excellent idea. To bolster your credibility with the judge and to prove the pictures were taken that very day, get hold of a newspaper printed on that day (every major paper stocks back issues and they will overnight it to you), and show it in the pictures with you (drape it over the door, perhaps). Don't to forget to take a close-up pic of it showing the date. Also, bring the paper with you to court. This will prevent the officer from stating that you were wearing a different shirt that day.

Ask where in the Constitution gives the state the authority to enact any law regarding seatbelts. Article 1 sec 8 is the section that outline what the congress has authority to enact laws.

Section 8. The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;


To borrow money on the credit of the United States;


To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;


To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;


To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;


To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States;


To establish post offices and post roads;


To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;


To constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court;


To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations;


To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;


To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;


To provide and maintain a navy;


To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;


To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;


To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;


To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings;--And


To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.

If it is not in Art.1 Sec. 8 and they make a law it is null and void .This is backed by Art. 6 para. 2
Article VI

All debts contracted and engagements entered into, before the adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.


This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.


The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.

If it is not set forth in the Constitution then it is UNCONSTITUTIONAL. After all the LAW is the Law, And the Constitution is the Supreme law of the Land. Fight these NAZI bastards Every way you can
"To ignore evil is to become an accomplice to it. DR. Martin Luther King jr.

Actually Steve, Amandment 10 say they can do it. "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

The seat belt law is a state law not federal. The Constitution doesn't say the states can't make a seat belt law, so there is nothing stopping them. If it was a federal law, I would absolutely agree. The unmitigated BS that is enacted into federal law on the grounds of regulating interstate commerce is amazing.

More concerning to me is retnug's comment that WA police do not have to appear in court. This sounds like a pretty clear violation of the 6th amandment: "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right...(other rights omited for brevity)...to be confronted with the witnesses against him".

You cannot cross examine notes.

Tom

In Washington minor traffic tickets such as this are civil not criminal. They changed this so that officers didn't have to waste there time in court.

------------------
Gunter
'82 SC Targa

The seatbelt laws are forced upon the states,in such a way that if they do not have the seatbelt law the state will not get Federal Highway funds.

BTW Atr. 6 par.2 Supercedes the Tenth amd.

This Constitution, and the laws of the United States(the several State that joined as a group, known as these united states) which shall be made in pursuance thereof;( this means all laws Federal,state and local)

and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby,( to follow the Constitution, and Art. 1 sec 8 powers set forth herein)
anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.


It boils down to Are we free or Not.


Again fight the Nazi Bastards any way you can.