If you accelerated hard knowing a cop was there you were basically challenging him and your gonna lose the initial fight every time. Not smart regardless. Got what you asked for.

“Exhibition of speed” is seems vague. Perhaps unconstitutionally so but getting that fight won is cost prohibitive. If I drove down the street legally in an RS, Mac 650LT, Ferrari or Perf isn’t that an exhibition of speed too? What about if I just rev my engine once? Now twice etc...Who determines what constitutes a violation? The judge? Based on his subjective notions?

If the ticket was for careless driving if in an urban or populated area then I could understand.

The citation seems bs if you were in an area away of others but you basically asked for it.

 

Here's the law in our jurisdiction, and I would hope that it would be similar in most:
Exceeding a posted speed limit by 10 to 19 miles per hour. $90 fine and two points.
Exceeding a posted speed limit by 20 to 29 miles per hour. $160 fine and two points.

But more importantly, you are missing the point. I've traveled the road in which the citation was issued, hundreds of times. It is extraordinarily rare to see any car that doesn't exceed 40 MPH, and probably the average speed is close to 50 MPH. So why was my brother ticketed? Simple, it was because of the car he was driving.

 

Soon we will be getting tickets for thinking about going fast.. a thought crime. States need revenue. Your word against cops, guess who judges will believe? Fight it anyway..

 

Maybe other jurisdictions are a lot more extreme in their traffic enforcement than the one in which I live, but there's no way that I would pay a lawyer to represent me in a BS case like this. The last time I was at a traffic court was about ten years ago. My son was cited for doing 80 in a 65 MPH zone, and I accompanied him at his court date. When my son was called before the judge, he admitted that he was going over the posted speed limit (my son told me that the State Trooper actually understated his speed). So my son was given Probation Before Judgement and had to pay court costs, after the judge verified that he had no former traffic violations. The probation period was 90 days and the court costs were $25. The judge told my son that if he were convicted of a traffic violation during the probation period, he would pay the speeding fine for this violation and two points would be charged to his record. The case took at most five minutes.

It's hard for me to believe that an "accelerating too fast" charge would be handled any differently, unless there are existing traffic violations on the OP's record. As a matter of fact I'd think that there's a good chance that the charge would be dropped, unless there is video evidence.

 

That was a wise way to handle it... in most cases, lawyers simply are not needed. Judges, clerks and prosecutors do not expect to see lawyers in the room on traffic ticket docket days....most courts have a system set up to deal directly with the driver/owner/ticketed party.

 

Gotcha, I like that system. If under 10 mph over the limit, it lets you pay a fine and move on without worrying about drivers license and insurance implications. Wish we had more states like that.

 

2. What? Every lawyer I have ever seen tries to move the hearing date and 99% of the time it is granted. And it is absolutely proper to ask to move it based on schedule of defendant.

 

That's called picking the nose of fate.

 

I didn't see any lawyers when I went with my son to traffic court. Granted that every Judge is different but the one who presided over my son's case gave no deference to the charging officer, i.e., there was a definite presumption of innocence. So a cop testifies that I accelerated too fast and I say no I didn't. I can't believe that any Judge would convict, unless the cop could substantiate his charge. I expect that the cop who issued the citation also knows that, but he just wants to inconvenience the OP by making him show up at a hearing or better yet get a lawyer and incur that expense.

 

I never saw the cop. If I did I would have shifted at 4k and 20% throttle. No chirping tires or burn-out. Just did what most of you probably do every week. Reving our car out safely with no cars near me. Not full throttle.

 

Yep and Yep. You are correct. That was a pretty inaccurate post.....

 

So we can conclude that this is all Montoya's fault for tilting the Law of Averages

 

I won't get into the details, but the $600 I paid for representation by a traffic attorney was the best $ I ever paid to an attorney (and I have paid legal bills in the 6 figures). Net-net, the attorney knows the judge your case is assigned to, and can get you the best deal possible if you are in the wrong. If you aren't in the wrong, the attorney is best positioned to get the case dismissed as quickly as possible. If you are going to have to challenge a LEOs version of events, the attorney is way more qualified than non-attorneys will be (even if you stay at a Holiday Inn before the hearing).

What is the saying about a person choosing to represent themself having a fool for a client?

 

It depends upon the charge, If I were charged with a serious traffic violation which could lead to the suspension of my license or worse yet, jail time, then you better believe that I'm hiring a lawyer. But in this case it's just for accelerating too fast. Not sure what the penalty is for conviction, but I can't believe its draconian.
If it's a criminal case, your admonition about representing yourself is prudent, but this is traffic court. There's no prosecuting attorney who'll be cross examining you. The cop gives his version and then the defendant gives his, and the burden is on the cop to prove his allegation. The Judge may ask a question or two, especially regarding priors. Depending upon the jurisdiction, there will likely be numerous other cases to be heard and the Judge wants to move things along. So unless I were intimidated by a traffic court appearance, I don't see the need for representation in this case.

 

if I recall correctly, it used to be (15 yrs ago) that 20mph over was considered reckless and then you were taken to jail (not sure what that entailed), I was extra careful never to exceed 20 over when I lived there. Under that limit, it was just a ticket and a fine. During in my time living there I never heard of anyone going to jail or having their car impounded.