Speeding ticket

[lankeeyankee]

Not going to get into a whos right or whos wrong match with you. Your an officer and I am a citizen who has been in traffic court more times then I can count on my hands when I was younger. This day I have a clean driving record and cant honestly remember the last time I was charged with a moving violation. I know my rights as a US citizen.

Taken from a law firms website.
Police Try to Get Probable Cause for a DUI Arrest
Usually a field sobriety test is taken to prove probable cause. For that reason, it is usually best to politely refuse to submit to the tests. Your chances of passing them are very slim because the police officer makes the determination based on his own judgment. The police can tell you to step out of the car, and you must. When the police ask you to perform tasks in an effort to test your sobriety though (like touching your finger to your nose, or standing on one leg) you can politely refuse to perform those actions.

Most states do require a driver to submit to a chemical test if the police officer has reasonable suspicion that you are in fact impaired. If you were not driving erratically, and you did not admit to having anything to drink, there might not be a reasonable suspicion. If, however, you did admit in conversation with the police that you had some drinks, or if you stumbled during one of the field sobriety tests, or were driving 10 mph under the speed limit, there is enough evidence for the police to have a reasonable suspicion. It is actually an intentionally low bar for police to meet in order to take the next step and do a chemical test. The most common consequence for not taking a chemical test is that your impairment will be implied by your refusal to take the test. Sometimes there are automatic severe penalties for anyone who refuses the chemical tests

 

[skydivr]

In TN, I think you can refuse the field sobreity test. If you then refuse the chemical test, it automatically counts as a FAIL.

But once you start refusing, you have basically in effect told the officer you HAVE a reason to refuse it (you HAVE been drinking); after that all the officer's professional consideration is likely thrown out the window and you are likely going in for the chemical test. Pass or fail, a heck of a nuisance.

Having said that: If you have been drinking at 1:30 AM at Hooters, and you get on your bike and ride, and you redline it in 1st in the city, I HOPE you get stopped before you kill yourself or someone else, and I have little sympathy.

 

[lankeeyankee]

Yes in TN and all states I believe you can refuse the field sobriety test but cant the chemical test. Field sobriety tests are not that accurate anyway. A person could have poor balance, eye hand cordination, road condition at an angle that your trying to balance on etc. to many things go into play. Alphabet can be screwed up if your dislexis, once you fail one of these its just more evidence. Field sobriety test are just used to make the case stronger for the officer, they are not accurate!!!!! What if I have an ear infection which effects my balance? What if I had a PUVA treatment and took medication that dialates my pupils for 18 hours does this mean I am stoned? What if I just got off an 18 hour shift and my eyes are bloodshot and I am driving home at 3AM do I think I can balance myself with some cops balancing circus tricks on the side of a dark interstate? Hell no I wouldnt pass it. Does this mean I am drunk? LEARN YOUR RIGHTS KEEP YOUR MOUTH SHUT!! Let your lawyer find the loop holes.
If you know your intoxicated your just giving them more evidence to make there case stronger against yourself. KEEP YOUR MOUTH SHUT the more you say the harder it is to fight in court! I learned this early in life from a very good Gun Lawyer in New Jersey. To many people run off at the mouth and pretty much stick there foot in there mouth.

I fully agree drinking and getting on a motorcycle to grip and rip it isnt the brightest thing to do.

In TN, I think you can refuse the field sobreity test. If you then refuse the chemical test, it automatically counts as a FAIL.

But once you start refusing, you have basically in effect told the officer you HAVE a reason to refuse it (you HAVE been drinking); after that all the officer's professional consideration is likely thrown out the window and you are likely going in for the chemical test. Pass or fail, a heck of a nuisance.

Having said that: If you have been drinking at 1:30 AM at Hooters, and you get on your bike and ride, and you redline it in 1st in the city, I HOPE you get stopped before you kill yourself or someone else, and I have little sympathy.

 

[Black Sheep]

They can do whatever they want!

 

[GNBRETT]

Not going to get into a whos right or whos wrong match with you. Your an officer and I am a citizen who has been in traffic court more times then I can count on my hands when I was younger. This day I have a clean driving record and cant honestly remember the last time I was charged with a moving violation. I know my rights as a US citizen.

Taken from a law firms website.
Police Try to Get Probable Cause for a DUI Arrest
Usually a field sobriety test is taken to prove probable cause. For that reason, it is usually best to politely refuse to submit to the tests. Your chances of passing them are very slim because the police officer makes the determination based on his own judgment. The police can tell you to step out of the car, and you must. When the police ask you to perform tasks in an effort to test your sobriety though (like touching your finger to your nose, or standing on one leg) you can politely refuse to perform those actions.

Most states do require a driver to submit to a chemical test if the police officer has reasonable suspicion that you are in fact impaired. If you were not driving erratically, and you did not admit to having anything to drink, there might not be a reasonable suspicion. If, however, you did admit in conversation with the police that you had some drinks, or if you stumbled during one of the field sobriety tests, or were driving 10 mph under the speed limit, there is enough evidence for the police to have a reasonable suspicion. It is actually an intentionally low bar for police to meet in order to take the next step and do a chemical test. The most common consequence for not taking a chemical test is that your impairment will be implied by your refusal to take the test. Sometimes there are automatic severe penalties for anyone who refuses the chemical tests

that is absolutely true that you need PC to arrest. but remember you can be arrested for DUI and beat it in court and still lose ur right to drive or ride. the criminal aspect is the criminal and the license revocation is seperate when you start refusing tests so if ur sober thats a poor idea.

for example, if a cop arrests someone based on his observations and the cop brings him/her into lock-up for a breathalyzer and they refuse the breathalyzer he/she will lose his right to operate because his consent has already be implied (implied consent) when you were issued ur operators license which is a privelage not a right. so yes you can refuse any and all tests but observations made by the officer can certainly equate to an arrest without you performing any field sobriety tests.

smell of an alcoholic mixed beverage, blood-shot glazed over eyes, slurred speach, where you were coming from, time of day, etc.... can all be PC to arrest without FST's. and if ur sober it would behoove you to perform any and all tests. PBT's are not legal everywhere. in fact, they are not legal here. the nystagmus test (Eye test) will bag you 99% of the time anyway. but ur right the standard or bar is very low when it comes to DUI.

 

[skydivr]

What tics me off is the drivers who continuously are being rearrested for their 5th and 6th and above DUI's but they are still on the street, driving drunk...

The local LEO (his wife works w/me) had a guy pulled over and in the back of a car out here the other day. It was his 6th, license revoked, and he had a 12 pack with half the wet cans empty on the seat beside him...my wife and child were on that road not 15 minutes before. If he hurt them, there'd be no jail that could keep me from him.

 

[captain]

I've read this a thousand times to drunks in the back of my car when I was a cop... You have two options on the street...

Here is how it typically rolls.

1. Traffic stop
2. Odor of alcohol, slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, confusion, trouble getting out of the car, can't stand up without leaning on the car.....
Can be take to jail already, experienced officers can typically already tell..... BUT just to be cautious and make sure you have a clear case.....

3. One leg stand, Walk and turn, 5 fingers, HGN (Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus)... <<< EYE test, you won't cheat this one...

4. Time to cuff and read...

5. Your in the back seat and get read this...

1. You have been arrested and the arresting officer has reasonable grounds to believe that you were driving or in actual physical control of a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicants.

2. You are requested to submit to a test or tests for the purpose of determining the presence and concentration of intoxicants in your body.

3. The test will be a (BREATH)(BLOOD) and will be administered at no cost to you.

4. In addition to this test, you may at your own expense have an additional test of your choice, provided that a sufficient quantity of any specimen obtained shall be available to the state for testing.

5. You are not entitled to consult with an attorney prior to making your decision on whether to submit to the state’s test.

6. You may refuse the state’s test, but as a consequence your driver’s license will be revoked or denied by the Department of Public.

7. If you consent to testing, are 21 years of age or older and the test result is .08 or more alcohol concentration, your driver’s license will be revoked or denied by the Department of Public Safety. If you are under 21 and consent to testing and the test result is 0.02 or more alcohol concentration, your driver’s license will be revoked or denied by the Department of Public Safety.

8. Will you take the state’s test?

Yes or No

Yes, go to station and take breath test..... Pass >> Get out of jail, sue PD Fail.... Jail!

No, go to jail

Either way roughly 10 hours later you get released and go get your car out of jail too....

Roughly 30 days later you go to criminal court and pay fine, do jail time, community service whatever the judge says...

Roughly 90 days later you go to an implied consent hearing with your attorney, a hearing officer and the cop, very informal sitting around a table in a conference room.

You tell your story, attorney ask questions, hearing officer listens... Go home.

2 weeks later you find out your license was suspended for

A. Failure to take the test
B. You took the test and failed

OR

C. Officer made illegal traffic stop, did not follow procedure, something technical occurred, recall on breathalyzer or something...

I made thousands of DUI arrest as my time as an officer and don't remember ever losing an implied consent hearing.....

There, free real advise.. Take the test it's your best shot....

FYI officers do not have to show radar, you don't have to know how it works, you don't have to know when it was calibrated or how it's calibrated during the arrest. In court the old defense is the calibration requirements which I carried in my ticket book.. That you verified calibration with tuning forks before the start of my shift and the radar indicated correctly, and that's pretty much about all you need to cover...

cap

 

[kromdom]

so far, two LEOs (one EX, the othe other current) have spoken and are pretty much on the same sheet of music. thank you both for the insight/gouge/advise.

 

[Travis England]

Okay let me clear a few things up and add some details....I live in Indiana so I guess each state has their own rules...the cop didn't see me leave hooters because I got pulled over about 10 miles away in the next town....I didn't get a dui everyone seemed to assume I was drinking....the reason I thought making me do all the stupid human tricks along with getting patted down and searched was uncalled for was he just gave my friend the breath test and told him to leave and did nothing other than give him the speeding ticket...the officer never seen me take off from the stop light he could only hear me as I was almost a mile away and around a bend in the road...he admitted to me after he wrote me the ticket that he couldnt tell me how fast I was going....I know I was speeding I was doing a little over 71 probably around 80 and the speed limit wasn't 45 like the cop said it was 30 but that just goes to show he didn't see me speed when I was in the 45 zone I was only doing 50

 

[Travis England]

You can take it court but the penalty is so bad when you fight and loose most don't try it. They will add court cost if you loose on top of the fine and the judges seem to pull cost out of thin air some times.

Law enforcement don't always rightfully write tickets, or even interpret the law right

Here in indiana when you pay a speeding ticket the court cost and all the fees are already in the ticket wether you go to court or not ...on the back of the ticket it tells the break down of what portion of the ticket goes to who...if you loose in court worst case is you just pay the ticket anyway

 

[Travis England]

Having said that: If you have been drinking at 1:30 AM at Hooters, and you get on your bike and ride, and you redline it in 1st in the city, I HOPE you get stopped before you kill yourself or someone else, and I have little sympathy.[/QUOT

I quite frankly don't give two ****s about your opinion...your just as bad as the cop making assumptions based on what you want to believe...I was not drinking...you were assuming I was in the city when I was actually on a long onramp that goes to the interstate ...I was not indangering anyone as their were no cars in sight not even as long as I spent a good 30 min along side the road...and im sure you have never sped before in your life ...if I never wanted to drive faster than 35 I would have bought a spree

 

[sanket_420]

 

[dadofthree]

Well you had him until you came in here and admitted your guilt 75 / 30

 

[skydivr]

Having said that: If you have been drinking at 1:30 AM at Hooters, and you get on your bike and ride, and you redline it in 1st in the city, I HOPE you get stopped before you kill yourself or someone else, and I have little sympathy.[/QUOT

I quite frankly don't give two ****s about your opinion...your just as bad as the cop making assumptions based on what you want to believe...I was not drinking...you were assuming I was in the city when I was actually on a long onramp that goes to the interstate ...I was not indangering anyone as their were no cars in sight not even as long as I spent a good 30 min along side the road...and im sure you have never sped before in your life ...if I never wanted to drive faster than 35 I would have bought a spree

I didn't accuse you of drinking (which you did not elaborate on in you OP); I said "IF YOU HAD". But I'm VERY glad you weren't drinking and riding. You know riding at 1:30 am on a loud bike may bring you unwelcome attention. IF YOU HAD, then I'd be standing by my statement.

In your OP you DID NOT state you hadn't been drinking (or not), and therefore left open the assumption you had. Which more often than not would be true. And I didn't accuse you of it, either.

Sure I have ridden faster than the speed limit, and I've been stopped and politely taken my medicine for it. More times than not the officer has noted that I'm a) not impaired, b) honest and c) contrite and has let me go. Smiling and talking friendly to the officer also helps, rather than a sullen or smart response.

That Police officer wasn't out there to roust you, he was out there to keep you from killing yourself or someone else (most likely someone else having priority).

What I was pointing out is that there are a chain of events that may have brought you undue attention, the removal of any one of them might have seen it never happen.

 

[sprayer]

61 or 71 double the speed limit,that could have been a 12 mth ban and retest it happened to me july 2010 and I was on a motorway doing 90 mph in a 40 mph limit (not proud of it)

 

[TallTom]

If you feel strongly about it, and want to go to court to argue it, go spend time in the law library (usually available at every courthouse) and study up on the statutes that you were cited for. It will spell out what all of the elements that have to be met are. Expect to devote several hours to this part. If you feel you can bring about reasonable doubt for the judge, go to court and do your best. That is what they have courts and judges for.

Based on what you have said happened, personally I'd argue it But I base that on my experiences of where I have lived and gone to court for. I will not say that my state and your state will be the same. However, in my experience, the requirements have been pretty tested in the courts and the standards are usually pretty close to the same everywhere.

You were speeding, but I doubt the cop can prove it. It's a matter of how well you think you can go into the courtroom and and argue it. Don't try and bring into question calibrations etc. 99% of the time they are going to be in calibration. You can certainly question competence in how the speed was established. Assuming the statute spells out the requirements that uphold it. 90% of the time the cop is running the radar at wide open settings, which goes out a mile, and he/she is waiting for it to sound off. Then they find the vehicle they suspect is doing the speed the gun says. It isn't the correct way to cite a speeder, but it is the lazy way. They usually take the lazy way.

BUT I promise you, and I can't stress this enough, if you don't prepare ahead of time it won't go well for you in court. They are in court everyday. They are trained in how to present and argue, you are not. You have to establish in court that the officer could not see you, can not prove your speed, or that you can bring into doubt, how the radar was used to cite you. I wouldn't expect much help from the judge hearing it your way if you already have a bad driving record. It will be right there at the judge's fingertips so don't think you can win him/her over by saying you never speed if you have a history of doing so.

Argue what you were cited for. All the rest is irrelevant.

 

[Travis England]

Thats some good info i didnt know u could look up things like that at the court house i will go check that out thanks

 

[300Busa]

I have written many of speeding tickets, had many challeng me in court....never lost one. The person waste half of their day waiting for traffic court to end for a trial, they lose and get stuck with the additional fees...love it. I don't have to provide proof of how fast you were going either...its all about being honest.

I liked the lady that told the judge I showed her the speed locked in the gun, but the gun didn't show her VIN# so I cant prove it was her...wtf, lol. The judge even chuckled. Or the people that say they were not going 25 over, they were going 8 over because they thought that was ok.

 

[proud dad]

What town in Indiana?

 

[chrisjp]

i couldn't have been going that fast officer as i had my brakes on