• Can't post after logging to the forum for the first time... Try Again - If you can't post in the forum, sign out of both the membership site and the forum and log in again. Make sure your COG membership is active and your browser allow cookies. If you still can't post, contact the COG IT guy at IT@Concours.org.
  • IF YOU GET 404 ERROR: This may be due to using a link in a post from prior to the web migration. Content was brought over from the old forum as is, but the links may be in error. If the link contains "cog-online.org" it is an old link and will not work.

Help me fight a lane splitting ticket.

daddykevin

daddykevin

Moped
On my 11 mile daily commute, I frequently will split lanes when traffic is stopped. I do this for several reasons, all of them safety related. I don't do it when traffic is moving, I generally ride just slightly faster than the speed of traffic in order to minimize threats, but when traffic is stopped at a light, I will split and go to the front to keep the idiots behind me.

So, along comes a caged cop who cites me for lane splitting, I'm not sure of the vehicle code section. I politely state my case, and he proceeds to write me up.

So... here's my chance to try and nullify this law, or lack of a law, or at least get some clarification. I will plead "not guilty", and request a jury trial. My hope is that a jury of my peers will include at least one or two riders.

I'm looking for facts on lane-splitting or lane-sharing. Pro's and Con's, safety statistics of distracted drivers on their commute, or other good information that can be used in court. I'm not trying to institute a law, although that would be nice, but rather to "nullify" by stating that the law shouldn't apply due to safety concerns for the motorcyclist.

Thanks for your help.
 
I am for splitting in some ways.  Mainly when it is 100* here and traffic is stopped.  I think Texas has no law for or against it though.  So what did he put on the ticket? 
I am less incline to do it since I watched a guy get creamed while splitting on my way home from work.  He failed to notice the car cutting through the two lanes of stopped traffic turning onto a side street.  I just do not think Texans are looking for bikes splitting and this idiot failed to do his part and notice a hazardous situation.
 
I wish you a lot of luck but as CA is the ONLY state where lane-splitting is permiitted I'm afraid you have a real uphill battle. The link posted above is probably the best source of info for you. Again, good luck!
 
Read applicable state statue(s) to understand the infraction. They are usually posted on the state's website.  Unless the law is vague you will be hard pressed to convince that you were doing something illegal in the name of safety... "Yes your honor... I was speeding so that I not anywhere near those dangerous cages..." 

Good luck...
 
edit: I note from your profile you're in Ft Worth, TX.

If a jury of your peers includes native Texans that have been riding motorcycles on the street for 30+years, I'll qualify.

If I'm on your jury you will lose your "safety related" arguments and the ticket will stand.

I am not in favor of legal lane splitting in Texas.  IMHO one lane width should = one vehicle in the lane, and violation of that tenet presents a safety hazard.

If you choose to ride on the street, "to keep the idiots behind me" as a safety tactic is a BS argument, IMHO.  To argue that getting ahead of inattentive drivers by splitting between them is "safe" or "safer" than maintaining traditionally recommended clearance distances is nonsense, IMHO, at the very least because you have reduced your clearance and therefore the time available to react to an un-predicted move by the inattentive driver (all other things being equal).

The sole logical justification for splitting is: to get to the destination quicker than if you don't split, assuming no accident in the process (again, IMHO).  This is supported by the info at laneshare.org, where all of the justifications for splitting relate to traffic congestion, none relate to safety.  I recognize that some space at laneshare.org is dedicated to suggesting that splitting does not present a greater risk than non-splitting riding; that is NOT the same as saying it is "safe" or "safer" to split, and the website does not point to any scientific basis for its contentions in this regard.

Just my opinion, it's a settled opinion and I'm entitled to it.

^-^
 
I have to agree with "centex".  And as far as getting ahead of the "idiots", there will always be more up ahead where you can see them.  Those behind still pose a threat.
 
Centex said:
If a jury of your peers includes native Texans that have been riding motorcycles on the street for 30+years, I'll qualify.

If I'm on your jury you will lose your "safety related" arguments and the ticket will stand.

I am not in favor of legal lane splitting in Texas.  IMHO one lane width should = one vehicle in the lane, and violation of that tenet presents a safety hazard.

If you choose to ride on the street, "to keep the idiots behind me" as a safety tactic is a BS argument, IMHO.  To argue that getting ahead of inattentive drivers by splitting between them is "safe" or "safer" than maintaining traditionally recommended clearance distances is nonsense, IMHO, at the very least because you have reduced your clearance and therefore the time available to react to an un-predicted move by the inattentive driver (all other things being equal).

The sole logical justification for splitting is: to get to the destination quicker than if you don't split, assuming no accident in the process (again, IMHO).  This is supported by the info at laneshare.org, where all of the justifications for splitting relate to traffic congestion, none relate to safety.  I recognize that some space at laneshare.org is dedicated to suggesting that splitting does not present a greater risk than non-splitting riding; that is NOT the same as saying it is "safe" or "safer" to split, and the website does not point to any scientific basis for its contentions in this regard.

Just my opinion, it's a settled opinion and I'm entitled to it.

^-^
Click to expand...
I've been riding on the street for 35 years, beginning in CA where it IS legal. I have split or shared lanes most of those years. Never down, never hit anyone, AND NEVER BEEN HIT FROM BEHIND.

It IS safer, when done properly... period.
 
daddykevin said:
I've been riding on the street for 35 years, beginning in CA where it IS legal. I have split or shared lanes most of those years. Never down, never hit anyone, AND NEVER BEEN HIT FROM BEHIND.

It IS safer, when done properly... period.
Click to expand...

In all sincerety - congratulations on your record, I hope it stands through your entire riding career.

However, your fortune to date does not support your argument.  That's not an opinion, that's based on a factual understanding of the concepts of statistics.

I'd welcome the opportunity to read a scientific presentation in support of your contention regarding safety.  It would certainly seem that if such a study existed, the folks at laneshare.org would give it prominent billing.

FYI, as a polite hint for your day in court, it may be to your benefit to understand and acknowledge the difference between your opinion, "expert opinion" and supported fact when facing a prosecuting attorney in a court of law.  His/her Honor is not running an internet forum.

Good Luck !
 
The ONLY safety related justification for splitting or riding on the shoulder around traffic that I have been unfortunate enough to do but not caught at was based on health reasons. 

I was stopped twice in long lines of backed up traffic on the interstate in 95+ degree temperatures.  Both times I tried to hang in my line but as I started to pass out from the heat I moved over to the shoulder and just coasted along to get some air.  If I had not I would surly have passed out.

Funny how fast you can ride when you know 10,000 upset NASCAR fans are behind you.  That time was near Talladega the day after the race.  The other time was on I 10 in La. in high heat and humidity.
 
Please keep up posted on the outcome. I've been tempted many, many times, but it is illegal in my state.  I cannot see my local courts caring the least little bit about safety if there is money to be collected.
 
The October issue of Motorcycle Consumer News had a very interesting article on ths very subject.  If you go on-line to their site you can get a copy of it.  I have always been concerned about the risks of lane sharing even though I have not lived in Ca where it is allowed.  The article had some statistics and observations that have given me cause to think about the pros and cons.  I wish I could remember more of the details (see what happens as you get older)  :mad:but if you can get a copy of it I think you'll find it very interesting.  Maybe some of my long time beliefs need to reevaluated.  Good luck.
 
some good info from  everyone.i am from  uk  orig  were  splitting  goes on,and on many  trips  the bike is  right besides yu  before  you  know it,and they do tend to ride  very fast,i now live in texas  and  here  turn signals are those funny things on  a stick that dont get used or inforced by  pds,on  a weekend ride we decided to hop on 1-35  which was as usual  the biggest parking lot in texas we decided not to split  lanes,a bike behind us did  and was creamed by  a bmw who switched lanes  and  no signals, we stopped to help,  the bmw didnt  the guy  was ok, we all learned  a lesson  that day,but its  your choice  if yu do it be  very  very careful
 
If we start sharing lanes with cages, then they are going to want to share lanes with us. I'd rather not.
If you're not in California, then I advise against it. If you are in California...I still advise against it.
I know this will date me, but more than once I've seen a lane splitter stopped hard by a car door, because the cage driver decided
that stopped in traffic was a great time to open the door and empty their ash tray on the street.
The top rear edge/corner of an open car door will penetrate a helmet.
 
I used to split lanes all the time in Ca ,most drivers there are used to it, but here in Texas ? Never ! If someone doesn't hit you , they will probably shoot you  :eek:
 
Pay the ticket and don't do this again. If you go to a jury trail you will lose on statute alone and nothing else. You are in Texas dude.
 
I've been riding over 40 years.

One thing I've found is violating traffic laws is patently stupid. No amount of justification makes it otherwise.
 
2linby said:
Pay the ticket and don't do this again. If you go to a jury trail you will lose on statute alone and nothing else. You are in Texas dude.
Click to expand...

I was thinking that as well, but not sure about TX law, if it's expressly illegal there, or if the ticket was for wreckless operation, or something like that.

I would think a better approach would be to work through state legislature to have the law changed to allow it if that's what you're after.  You'd have a better chance of changing the law with a large number of signatures than having a judge determine that the law is wrong.  They don't usually do that.
 
Sport Rider said:
2linby said:
Pay the ticket and don't do this again. If you go to a jury trail you will lose on statute alone and nothing else. You are in Texas dude.
Click to expand...

I was thinking that as well, but not sure about TX law, if it's expressly illegal there, or if the ticket was for wreckless operation, or something like that.

I would think a better approach would be to work through state legislature to have the law changed to allow it if that's what you're after.  You'd have a better chance of changing the law with a large number of signatures than having a judge determine that the law is wrong.  They don't usually do that.
Click to expand...

Nor should a judge determine that a law is wrong, except on constitutional challenge. It is not the Judiciary's role to make law, though in the last 50 years they have done it far too much.
 
Obviously a very polarizing topic. It is neither specifically legal, nor illegal.

I commute daily and observe many things. Drivers sitting in their cars texting, on phone calls, drinking coffee, eating food, reaching for the radio, putting on make-up, or frequently doing multiples of these tasks. Completely distracted and oblivious to anything around them.

Cars are quieter, with better sound systems, abs, airbags, and other safety features to make the operator feel safer and allow for even further dis-engagement. I split lanes at stop lights, and will continue to do so. I'm not trying to legislate in this endeavor, nor in this forum. However, I will try and "nullify" the jury. In other words, being found "not guilty" even though having broken the law, or not following the judges instructions. If this happens enough, it will have the effect of invalidating the statute.

 
daddykevin said:
I commute daily and observe many things. Drivers sitting in their cars texting, on phone calls, drinking coffee, eating food, reaching for the radio, putting on make-up, or frequently doing multiples of these tasks. Completely distracted and oblivious to anything around them.
Click to expand...

All these are reasons why I wouldn't split lanes anywhere other than where people are at least used to it, i.e., anywhere other than California.  I personally don't think you have much hope in battling the ticket, but good luck with it and I'll be interested to hear how it turns out.
 
First you say:
daddykevin said:
It is neither specifically legal, nor illegal
Click to expand...
Then you say:
....invalidating the statute.
Click to expand...
So which is it... if it is neither legal or nor illegal, what does the statute say? What specifically does it say on your ticket? If it says something like, say 'Driving to endanger' then you need to show you weren't doing anything dangerous. Since you won't stand much chance of overturning a statute against driving to endanger, if lane splitting isn't specifically mentioned mentioned in the statute, what does apply? If it comes down to your opinion of dangerous against the cops opinion, I don't think you have much chance, as a cop is considered an expert witness. I think you would need an independent expert witness to testify that lane-splitting is safe, and a good lawyer to figure out how to apply all this to the law.

If lane splitting isn't specifically banned there has to be some other law the cop thinks you broke. That's the key, you aren't fighting a lane splitting ticket, look up the law cited on the ticket and see if it applies to your case. Then if you still want to fight this, seek the consul of a good lawyer.
 
Take a good look around at all the efforts by many coordinated motorcycle groups in Texas to work with the legislature to get a bill passed to allow lane splitting. Your situation is not unique, the trail to getting this approved in Texas is paved with defeat after defeat.

Challenging this in court based on your citation will do nothing to change state statute, this must be done legislatively. Any attorney that you contact regarding representation in this matter will almost certainly tell you the same thing (unless he smells money, and it will take a LOT of it - from you - to take this on).

JMHO

Dan
 
daddykevin said:
Centex said:
If a jury of your peers includes native Texans that have been riding motorcycles on the street for 30+years, I'll qualify.

If I'm on your jury you will lose your "safety related" arguments and the ticket will stand.

I am not in favor of legal lane splitting in Texas.  IMHO one lane width should = one vehicle in the lane, and violation of that tenet presents a safety hazard.

If you choose to ride on the street, "to keep the idiots behind me" as a safety tactic is a BS argument, IMHO.  To argue that getting ahead of inattentive drivers by splitting between them is "safe" or "safer" than maintaining traditionally recommended clearance distances is nonsense, IMHO, at the very least because you have reduced your clearance and therefore the time available to react to an un-predicted move by the inattentive driver (all other things being equal).

The sole logical justification for splitting is: to get to the destination quicker than if you don't split, assuming no accident in the process (again, IMHO).  This is supported by the info at laneshare.org, where all of the justifications for splitting relate to traffic congestion, none relate to safety.  I recognize that some space at laneshare.org is dedicated to suggesting that splitting does not present a greater risk than non-splitting riding; that is NOT the same as saying it is "safe" or "safer" to split, and the website does not point to any scientific basis for its contentions in this regard.

Just my opinion, it's a settled opinion and I'm entitled to it.

^-^
Click to expand...
I've been riding on the street for 35 years, beginning in CA where it IS legal. I have split or shared lanes most of those years. Never down, never hit anyone, AND NEVER BEEN HIT FROM BEHIND.

It IS safer, when done properly... period.
Click to expand...

NEWSFLASH!
It is only safer when the automobiles and their associated licensed operators realize that it is the law and thus yield to you some right of way.  any ILLEGAL lane splitting is NOT safer.  AND the mindset of Texas Motor Vehicle Operators is such that I would be afraid to split lanes (though I love the concept).  You in Texas now boy.  You're goin' to jail.

chuck in Texas
 
fartymarty said:
...but more than once I've seen a lane splitter stopped hard by a car door, because the cage driver decided
that stopped in traffic was a great time to open the door....
Click to expand...
daddykevin said:
I split lanes at stop lights, and will continue to do so.
Click to expand...

Yep, one was at a red traffic light, that's one of the two I've seen. It damaged two cars, a bike, and injured two people.
It was a rare event where the cager was injured worse that the cyclist, but legally it was the cyclist at fault. Young lady opened
her door at the light to retrieve the part of her coat she had closed in the door when she first got in. The bike's front wheel
broke her arm and entered the door opening and ended up in between the back of the steering wheel an into the speedometer.
His front fender cut her face up pretty good as well. He had a hurt wrist and some chest bruises and ended up on top of the hood of
the car on the left. I was caged two cars back and mentally I had barely acknowledged the bike passing when it's travel was halted.
Like you always hear, "It seemed to happen so fast."

If you do split lanes, stop it. If that's not an option for you then go really slow and cover that front brake. Remember that
passengers will open car doors as well, to toss out their cold Starbucks and sometimes even just to spit.
 
From http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/msb/msbfaqs.htm

  19. Can I ride my motorcycle between cars in traffic?
The law doesn't specifically say one way or the other, but there are several statutes that may come to bear depending upon the circumstances, i.e. right of way, obligation to drive in a single lane, signal intention, passing with safety, etc. Motorcycles are considered equally as cars regarding traffic laws, so the single lane, signal intention and other statutes in the Transportation Code could come in to play.

The main statute that makes "lane splitting" illegal is Transportation Code Section 545.060, entitled "Driving on Roadway Laned for Traffic."
An operator on a roadway divided into two or more clearly marked lanes for traffic:
shall drive as nearly practical entirely within a single lane; and
may not move from the lane unless that movement can be made safely.

Texas Transportation Code

The key may require you to prove your movement was done safely.  This could become a subjective argument as to what constitutes "safely".  If you could provide research papers on the subject that show lane splitting poses no greater risk to the rider, then you might have a chance.  Without research or a qualified expert witness on the subject, it's you against the officer as to whether it was safe.  Your years of doing it without an accident won't count.  In God we trust.  All others must bring research.

FWIW - as the law is written now, should you get in a wreck or cause one by startling a driver, you would probably be at fault
 
There wouldn't happen to be a Red Light Camera at that intersection, would there?  If there is, request a copy of the video.  They have to give it to you; it's The Law!  Once you have it, you can use it to weave a narrative which supports your side of the story.  Failing that, you might see what the cop originally saw and decide this isn't a good place to mount a challenge.  You can also request a copy of the cop's dash-cam. 

This is what they speak of when they mention "research" - some empirical data which removes the 'he said, she said' factor.  Those camera videos are a part of the public record and you should use them.  I may not be much for lane-splitting, but I'm all about making The Law work for you rather than against you.
 
Will Texas give you a jury trial for a traffic infraction?  I'm not too sure
on this either.  You'll get to stand in front of a Judge, and plead your
case... Then he'll make you pay the fine.  Traffic laws usually stand over
circumstantial actions, no matter how much sense it makes.
 
OOOOH BOY... lane sharing... Mixed feelings about that one. As far as your day in court, i can tell you from experience that whatever "argument" you have for committing an offense, will most likely fall upon deaf ears to the judge. The Jury is instructed to listen to the facts, not opinions from both the prosecution and defense side. so lets start with the facts.

FACT: the defendant in this case broke a number of laws designed for safety in an attempt to be safe by sharing or splitting lanes... and was caught by an Officer, most likely on camera which will be introduced as evidence.
OPINION: the defendant in this case believes that he should be allowed to break the law/laws by sharing or splitting lanes because he feels it is safe to do so if it is done "right".

Now, as i stated above, i have stood in court and listened to multiple offenders complain to the Judge/Jury that although they were caught red handed, with video evidence against them, they believed they should get away with it.
Sorry, but when i get pulled over for speeding (yes "we" speed too) i know that i don't have much of an argument... If you break the law and get caught, be honest about it, tell the Judge that you did it, and ask for defensive driving so it does not go on your record.

Ride safe, and stop drawing negative attention to your self.  :p

 
 
I heard the only reason it was made legal in Ca. A long time ago was because peoples air cooled bikes were seizing up in the stop and go traffic [mostly stop] . Freeways are a parking lot 24 7 out there .
 
rdm197apd said:
OOOOH BOY... lane sharing... Mixed feelings about that one. As far as your day in court, i can tell you from experience that whatever "argument" you have for committing an offense, will most likely fall upon deaf ears to the judge. The Jury is instructed to listen to the facts, not opinions from both the prosecution and defense side. so lets start with the facts.

FACT: the defendant in this case broke a number of laws designed for safety in an attempt to be safe by sharing or splitting lanes... and was caught by an Officer, most likely on camera which will be introduced as evidence.
OPINION: the defendant in this case believes that he should be allowed to break the law/laws by sharing or splitting lanes because he feels it is safe to do so if it is done "right".

Now, as i stated above, i have stood in court and listened to multiple offenders complain to the Judge/Jury that although they were caught red handed, with video evidence against them, they believed they should get away with it.
Sorry, but when i get pulled over for speeding (yes "we" speed too) i know that i don't have much of an argument... If you break the law and get caught, be honest about it, tell the Judge that you did it, and ask for defensive driving so it does not go on your record.

Ride safe, and stop drawing negative attention to your self.  :p
Click to expand...
+1

And here in Texas, you are allowed to "answer" most moving traffic violations by pleading nolo contendere, paying the applicable fees (not cheap), and then taking an approved "Defensive Driving" course (a little cheaper).  And you cannot have taken a course within the past 12 months.  If you do all of this in the prescribed time and format, then the ticket will be dropped from your record and kept off your insurance record.  It saves money on the insurance side, but taking this option cost about the same money as simply paying the fine and court costs.  I'm not sure that lane splitting would be one for which you could take this option.

Almost every year there are lane splitting bills introduced into the Texas legistature.  For years they have been soundly defeated as being unsafe in this state.  I personally think trying to win this argument in court is a huge waste of effort and will draw the stiffest possible penalty.  I also think people illegally lane splitting will hurt the cause FOR lane splitting in Texas as there is already a large lack of support for it here.  Even if lane splitting WERE made legal in Texas, I believe it would take a long time and too many deaths before Texas auto drivers would tolerate it despite the potential penaltiesand ramifications for "willfully" harming motorcyclist who are engaging in the practice.  AND with well more than 50% of the vehicles on Texas roads being SUVs or pick-ups, lane width can come into play I think.  Add in a few million weaving cell phone talkers, a billion road gaters (semi truck tire carcasses), other road debris, a drunk driving related death percentage 12% higher than the national average, more road violence cases than a majority of states, and more large animals killed on the road than most states and the case for cramming something or someone new into my lane of traffic just doesn't sit too well with us and the legislature has consistently voted that it certainly will not make us safer.

COULD we learn to live with it and make it as safe as California's experience with lane sharing?  Maybe.  BUt it's going to take a legislature, and the populace, willing to accept the body count of the learning curve at a time when we ARE making good strides in lowering the body count from drunk driving and road rage.  I really don't see it happening anytime soon. 

WOULD I LANE SHARE?  Yeah, probably.  If I felt the circumstances were right for it and things were not TOO congested and the flow of traffic seemed acceptable then I would probably give it a go.  But just as an everyday, anytime, ability to get somewhere faster method I think I would not.  There's my .02 and worth probably half what ya paid fer it.
 
ChipDoc said:
There wouldn't happen to be a Red Light Camera at that intersection, would there?  If there is, request a copy of the video.  They have to give it to you; it's The Law!  Once you have it, you can use it to weave a narrative which supports your side of the story.  Failing that, you might see what the cop originally saw and decide this isn't a good place to mount a challenge.  You can also request a copy of the cop's dash-cam. 

This is what they speak of when they mention "research" - some empirical data which removes the 'he said, she said' factor.  Those camera videos are a part of the public record and you should use them.  I may not be much for lane-splitting, but I'm all about making The Law work for you rather than against you.
Click to expand...

This is a great piece of advice! Thank you! This is the kind of information that I need.
 
daddykevin said:
.... This is the kind of information that I need.
Click to expand...

Well, that's debatable, too  :rotflmao:

(daddykevin - a joke offered in good spirit as I follow your plight; obviously I respectfully disagree with your position but I don't think it likely that you alone are creating significant serious harm to others; there will never be a shortage of folks wasting court time and potentially damaging the image of motorcycling by their behavior on the road, so you might as well go for it)
 
daddykevin, why do you want a jury trial?

Are you going to argue that you didn't do anything illegal or do you feel that motorcycles should be exempt from the Texas statute?  If it is the latter, then you've admitted you violated the law and the judge will likely fine against you.  An attempt to make m/c exempt from that law would likely be outside the scope of your trial. 

If it's the former, then you are going to have to prove to the judge that your lane splitting is not a violation of the Texas statute.  Again, this could come down to getting the judge/jury to believe that what you did was, by definition, safe.

Oh, you may want to review past efforts to make lane sharing legal in Texas.  A quick google search shows that it was discussed in Texas a few years back.  That history may help you.   
 
Rev was right, in an earlier post, when he said lane splitting only works when other (car) drivers know lane splitting is the law, and is legal.

I did it for almost 3 decades in California. Never had a problem. Didn't do it when I thought the situation was unsafe.

I live in Maryland now. The Motor Vehicle Code prohibits lane splitting / sharing.

Some people need to be taught a lesson. You have the right to protest a law, and to work to have it changed. Violating the law is not a valid exercise of those rights, especially when it may kill someone.

If you don't like the laws regarding lane sharing in your State, you have the right to move to another State.

But don't freaking come crying that you broke the law and you need help getting out of it. That is pathetic.
 
Privateer and Dady,  This is a very interesting thread and everyone is entitled to there opinion, but we need to keep it cool
 
Keep your comments on topic. NO NAME CALLING! If you disagree with a posting, state why but keep it civil or your posts will be "nuked." You have been officially warned twice, there will not be a third warning.
 
The history of US law is filled with cases where folks broke a law and then challenged it until if was overturned. Of course our jails have been home to folks who tried and failed.

Personally, I think you'd have a much better chance of success if the inability to lane share was somehow an infringement on your free speech, ability to practice your religion, right to bear arms or similar guarantees. Barring that, I think you're going to find little interest.
 
I don't know Texas law, but you are probably not going to get a jury trial if it's in infraction. 

Secondly, don't do a bunch of research on the Internet and then try to introduce it at your trial. The deputy prosecutor will immediately object on the grounds that you are not an expert.

The officer will testify as to his observations and that what he saw fits the statute. Unless there is some dispute as to what actually occurred, you will be found guilty of the traffic offense.

If you attempt to put the law on trial, you are probably going to upset an already overworked traffic court judge/magistrate.

If there is no dispute as to what happened, your best hope is that the officer doesn't show and the prosecutor dismisses the ticket.
 
THe Constitution guarantees the right to a trial by a jury of peers.
Sixth Ammendment
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
Click to expand...

In Texas, as in other states, you just have to ask and the state has to deliver.
 
daddykevin said:
Obviously a very polarizing topic. It is neither specifically legal, nor illegal.

I commute daily and observe many things. Drivers sitting in their cars texting, on phone calls, drinking coffee, eating food, reaching for the radio, putting on make-up, or frequently doing multiples of these tasks. Completely distracted and oblivious to anything around them.

Cars are quieter, with better sound systems, abs, airbags, and other safety features to make the operator feel safer and allow for even further dis-engagement. I split lanes at stop lights, and will continue to do so. I'm not trying to legislate in this endeavor, nor in this forum. However, I will try and "nullify" the jury. In other words, being found "not guilty" even though having broken the law, or not following the judges instructions. If this happens enough, it will have the effect of invalidating the statute.
Click to expand...

I'm not trying to be disrespectful, but you are sorely mistaken about the significance of you winning your case.  If you win, nobody pays any attention. If you lose, nobody pays attention. You will not score some huge moral victory. All you will do is either pay a fine or not. Nothing more...... Nothing less. If you think otherwise you must be suffering delusions of grandeur.
 
Rev Ryder said:
THe Constitution guarantees the right to a trial by a jury of peers.
Sixth Ammendment
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
Click to expand...

In Texas, as in other states, you just have to ask and the state has to deliver.
Click to expand...

Im afraid the citizens of Indiana are being denied their rights. I work in the system. What people fail to understand is that an infraction is not a criminal offense. It is a civil action. You will not get a jury in Indiana for a traffic infraction.

Try to get a public defender too. You will be in for a rude awakening. It's not going to happen

Another thing....  The standard of proof in a criminal trial is that the state has to present proof beyond a reasonable doubt. For an infraction, the state only has to prove a 51% likelihood that the offense occurred. Aka preponderance of the evidence.
 
Asto's correct.  The ticket is not criminal so a jury trial is not a right. 

Not sure about Texas, but in AZ, at the initial hearing, you simply plead guilty or not.  If you chose the latter, the you are given a trial date.  On that date, you and a whole bunch of other people will take turns presenting your cases to the judge.  If the ticketing officer does not show up, your case will be dismissed, else you'll each get your turn to tell your side, then the judge will rule.

Daddykevin, I'm not a lawyer, but from my reading of the TX statutes, the odds are not in your favor.  You will need to cite the applicable statutes and why what you did does not fall under them.  Interpretation of what constitutes "safe" is key.  You will need scientific evidence beyond your personal experience.  What if I told you I've smoked one pack of cigarettes a day for 30 years and yet I don't have cancer.  Does that mean they are safe?

Final thought.  If I'm the judge, I'm asking you one question:  if you feel this law is unjust, why didn't you work to change it before you got a ticket for it?

Good luck!
 
Very good and insightful information, from everyone. Perhaps I'll rethink my position of fighting the ticket.

I will, however, continue to work for the right to split lanes or "filter forward" as I continue doing it to this day and feel safer in doing so. Remember, I only do this when approaching a stop light, all cars are stopped, and only when safe.

Thank you all for contributing!
 
I apologize for the bluntness and tone of my previous post.

But I stand by the message.

Too many of my fellow Americans, many of whom have never served the Nation appreciably, think when they break a law and are caught, the law must somehow be unjust or immoral.

We Americans have shed far too much blood to protect not just individual freedoms, but the rule of law and individual responsibility, to accept those kinds of attitudes. And yet we, as a society, seem to do exactly that, to our detriment.

So forgive me if I offended you, with my written word, that was not my intent.
 
daddykevin said:
Very good and insightful information, from everyone. Perhaps I'll rethink my position of fighting the ticket.

I will, however, continue to work for the right to split lanes or "filter forward" as I continue doing it to this day and feel safer in doing so. Remember, I only do this when approaching a stop light, all cars are stopped, and only when safe.

Thank you all for contributing!
Click to expand...

Man.... Head to court just in case the officer doesn't show. If he shows then you can still plead guilty. It's no different than just paying the ticket outright. It could be worth it to save you a couple a hundred bucks.
 
astros50 said:
daddykevin said:
Very good and insightful information, from everyone. Perhaps I'll rethink my position of fighting the ticket.

I will, however, continue to work for the right to split lanes or "filter forward" as I continue doing it to this day and feel safer in doing so. Remember, I only do this when approaching a stop light, all cars are stopped, and only when safe.

Thank you all for contributing!
Click to expand...

Man.... Head to court just in case the officer doesn't show. If he shows then you can still plead guilty. It's no different than just paying the ticket outright. It could be worth it to save you a couple a hundred bucks.
Click to expand...


I don't know if it's different down there or not. But a lot of  times in court, you can plea bargin with the officer for a lessor charge. Normally something that doesn't show on your licence. Although the finds tend to be the same. It isn't hard to figure that the main idea is income for the town. Although I'm sure some officers want to do the right thing. It winds up being more about town funds than public safety (IMO of course).
 
Cap'n Bob said:
astros50 said:
daddykevin said:
Very good and insightful information, from everyone. Perhaps I'll rethink my position of fighting the ticket.

I will, however, continue to work for the right to split lanes or "filter forward" as I continue doing it to this day and feel safer in doing so. Remember, I only do this when approaching a stop light, all cars are stopped, and only when safe.

Thank you all for contributing!
Click to expand...

Man.... Head to court just in case the officer doesn't show. If he shows then you can still plead guilty. It's no different than just paying the ticket outright. It could be worth it to save you a couple a hundred bucks.
Click to expand...


I don't know if it's different down there or not. But a lot of  times in court, you can plea bargin with the officer for a lessor charge. Normally something that doesn't show on your licence. Although the finds tend to be the same. It isn't hard to figure that the main idea is income for the town. Although I'm sure some officers want to do the right thing. It winds up being more about town funds than public safety (IMO of course).
Click to expand...

It's not always about town revenue generation.  Around here you first meet with the DA or ADA and they have the ability to drop charges or plea bargain, with many cases resolved with no points and a verifiable donation to one of several charities
 
here in NC, my Improper Passing ticket was reduced by the DA to "Improper Equipment" after I took a defensive driving course.  "Improper Equipment" being my brain!  :))
 
Sport Rider said:
here in NC, my Improper Passing ticket was reduced by the DA to "Improper Equipment" after I took a defensive driving course.  "Improper Equipment" being my brain!  :))
Click to expand...

I have that improper equipment problem too. Many times.

My favorite recent one was when I got a speed camera ticket (non-police, $40 and no record of it). I saw the sign (speed camera ahead) and saw it flash the car 8 or 9 car-lengths in front of me. But brain failed to brake hard enough, and I was 1 mph over the trigger speed. So 1 mph cost me $40 but I got a smoking picture of myself with the front end diving down and the bike starting to squat under hard braking. It just wasn't enough.

EDIT: I have since applied PhotoBlocker to my motorcycle and car plates, and been flashed by 3 different speed photo radars and not gotten a single letter demanding payment. Not to mention, spraying PhotoBlocker on your plate is not illegal, because it does not prevent the police from reading your plate, nor does it obscur the plate to police car mounted video equipment. But since most photo speed radar is a) commerical, not government, and b) has to use a flash to get a good picture due to the movement of the picture etc. etc., it doesn't break any laws because there is nothing in Maryland Motor Vehicle Code which says you cannot defeat photo speed radar.

 
OK John. I've never heard of it. What is photoblocker? A film, spray, cover? How does it work? is it pricey? Info, more info please!  ;)
 
ConnieFan said:
Asto's correct.  The ticket is not criminal so a jury trial is not a right. 
Click to expand...

In Texas any moving traffic violation is a Class C misdemeanor and is handled under Texas Criminal Procedural Law.  Ask for a trial by jury and you will get it. 

THis from the Harris County webpage
Information about Traffic Cases
Options for Responding to a Traffic Ticket

Criminal Jurisdiction

Justices of the Peace have original jurisdiction in criminal cases punishable by fine only, or punishable by a fine and a sanction not consisting of confinement or imprisonment.

Criminal procedures for cases that are within the criminal jurisdiction of the Harris County Justice Courts are found in Chapter 45 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure.

The Rules of Evidence governing the trials of criminal actions in the District Courts apply to a criminal proceeding in the Justice Courts.

The Harris County District Attorney prosecutes traffic cases filed in the Harris County Justice Courts.

The Harris County Justices of the Peace have promulgated Local Rules. You may view the Local Rules at each Justice Court.

Rights of Defendants

If you are accused of an offense within the jurisdiction of the Justice Court, you have certain rights.

You have the right to see the complaint or citation that has been filed with the court.

You have the right to a trial by jury, but you may waive the right to a trial by jury and be tried by the court.

You have the right to be represented by an attorney of your choice. You are not required to be represented by an attorney. An attorney may make an appearance on your behalf.

You have the right to remain silent and not to give evidence against yourself. You may waive this right and discuss your case with a prosecutor in an effort to dispose of your case without trial.

First Appearance in Court

Your traffic citation or summons will specify a date and time on which you are required to appear in court.

At the time of your first appearance, you will be identified as the defendant, and you will be asked how you plead to the offense with which you are charged.

Pleas are "not guilty," "guilty," or "no contest."

If you plead not guilty, your case will be set for trial. You may waive your right to a trial by jury and have the case heard by the court. At your request, the court will subpoena a witness on your behalf, but you must furnish the court with the name, address, and telephone number of each witness prior to trial. You may be required to attend a pre-trial conference.

If you refuse to enter a plea, the court will enter a plea of not guilty for you, and your case will be set for a jury trial unless you waive that right.
If you plead guilty or no contest, the court will find you guilty and assess a fine as punishment. A plea of no contest has the same result as a plea of guilty, but it may not be used against you in any civil proceeding that might arise from the incident leading to your arrest.

If you are pleading guilty or no contest, you may present any evidence or documents to the court in connection with the offense and you may explain any mitigating circumstances that may affect punishment.

If you are unsure about how to plead, do not hesitate to enter a plea of not guilty.

The court may be required to provide you certain notices, and it is your responsibility to notify the court of any change of address.

If You Do Not Want To Appear In Court

Pay the Acceptable Fine Online

For most offenses for which a citation has been issued, fines can be paid online by using the Harris County Justice of the Peace Courts' website. Online payments may be made until 11:00 p.m. on the appearance date shown on your ticket.  Unless a warrant has been issued ordering your arrest, an online payment may also be made after your appearance date until at least five (5) business days before a scheduled trial date.

Pay the Acceptable Fine in Person or by Mail

If you do not want to appear in court, you have the option of paying your fine by mail or by paying in person at the Justice Court as directed on your citation or summons. Before the time you must appear in court, mail or bring to the court a Traffic Citation Reply Form together with your payment of the acceptable fine. The acceptable fine amount will include the court costs for the offense with which you are charged.

If you are paying by mail, you must pay by cashier's check or money order, payable to the Harris County Justice Court. If you are paying in person, you may pay your fine in cash, by cashier's check or money order, or by credit card.

Payment of the acceptable fine constitutes a finding of guilt in open court as though you had entered a plea of no contest.

Enter a Plea of Not Guilty by Mail

Before the time you must appear in court, you may mail or bring to the court a plea of not guilty using the Traffic Citation Reply Form. The court will set your case for a jury trial. If you notify the court that you waive your right to a jury trial, your case will be set for a trial by the court. You may be required to attend a pre-trial conference.
Click to expand...

Don't tell a guy in Texas who's had as many tickets as I have he can't have a jury trial.  :(
 
Cap'n Bob said:
OK John. I've never heard of it. What is photoblocker? A film, spray, cover? How does it work? is it pricey? Info, more info please!  ;)
Click to expand...

Its a spray, really just a clear acrylic like you'd clear coat a car with. Amazon has it (search PhotoBlocker) and thats where I got mine. Not very expensive. The spray can will easily do your bike and one or two cars.

I put three coats on my bike plate. Cleaned it very well first, then a very thin coat and wait 10 minutes, then a good coat and wait 15 minutes, and then a final good heavy coat with the plate laying flat on a carboard box. When it dried, it was smooth as glass, and I tested it by trying to take a picture with my digital camera (it uses the flash in the shadows inside my garage, even with overhead lights on) and all I could see of the plate was a big white ball of light obscuring the plate numbers, and even the handicap symbol.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top