Thanks doc,

Yeah, that used to be a fun trip, especially in a good car. It's a chance to move through a whole lot of bad, slow traffic at a reasonable speed and enjoy the pleasure of a nice machine. a long as all you have to worry about are the ground cops and you have a V1 it's not too worrisome but this adds a whole new element to the game

 

According to 2002 version:

subsection (a) no person shall drive a vehicle upon that highway at a speed greater than 60 or 65 miles per hour, as posted

NO SUBSECTION (B) ???? Could have been added 2003-2005

subsection (c) This section shall remain in effect only until the date specified in subsection (c) of Section 22336, and as of that date is repealed.

You can probably plead your case using PC22400 MINIMUM SPEED LAW which states:

No person shall drive upon a highway at such a slow speed as to impede or block the normal and reasonable movement of traffic, unless the reduced speed is necessary for safe operation, because of a grade, or in compliance with law.

I would certainly leave off the last portion of PC22400 simply because they should know this if they're going to oppose it. Trust me none of the officers will walk into court with a full Penal Code book; they usually carry a cheat sheet in lamination.

It's worth a go.....

-Eli

 

bad news is it will be her word against the CHP as to whether he said that or not and i'd bet the judge goes with the cop 100% of the time. and, i'd also bet the CHP wrote down that she claimed to be "only" 10 mph over the speed limit. she'll have to admit to doing 75 mph (10 mph over) to the judge before she can bring up the claim of what the officer said in response. once she does, she's dead.

 

22356(b) No person shall drive a vehicle upon that highway at a speed greater than 70 miles per hour, as posted.

It is a very sketchy law.

But when in court you need to ask how they abtained your speed, with an aircraft, radar, etc.

If it is with an aircraft like you think, ask how they were able to track 6 cars at once with a timing device, and if they did use a timing device without radar or lidar as a second device to mark your speed, than that would go into the speed trap law. Also ask your wife if she passed any other cars on the road before she was pulled over because if she did than that would make her a prime target.

 

Well, the limit out there is 70 so she only admitted to going about 5 over which is pretty slow for that stretch of highway. Maybe illegal but normal and if they tried to enforce the 70 MPH it would take more than a few airplanes. i normally go through there at around 90-95 and I don't pass many people.

But I like Eli's advice to at least show up and look for the cops and if they are there she can always ask the judge to go to traffic school before she has to face the cops.

Lots of good advice.

Thanks guys!

 

Thanks David,

Hurry up and get through school so you can be the 6speeders attorney Great information! I know where Ben is coming from as we have probably all experienced what he predicts but I'm sure that many of us like Eli and myself have fought these things and won. BTW, she had not passed anyone before they all got pulled over and she was not in the front of the line. she does drive a bit fast in her car but not in the Range Rover and especially with her doggie kids in the vehicle.

We are going to go to court to see what happens and I will post the outcome either way.

Thanks again for all of the great advice from this great forum,

Chuck

 

Chuck,

Good Luck my man, I'll see about going back to school..... It's a little hard right now but who knows.... A Jurist Doctrine might come in handy one day.....

-Eli

 

Just a thought. Are there signs that state clearly that the stretch of road is patrolled by aircraft?? If not.. I wonder if they still can do it... Could be "attrapment" . Fascinating thread.. Welcome to California where the cops collect taxes and create revenue to pay for more cops. Give it another 100 years and we all are cops.
Good luck with the ticket
HarryR