Orange County Criminal Attorney Blog

Takoma Park, Maryland, in the Washington, D.C. suburbs, has used automated traffic cameras to enforce speed limits for several years. Fines collected from citations issued based on the cameras have become a substantial source of revenue for the town. California has also begun to use traffic cameras across the state to enforce speed limits and catch drivers who run red lights. While the system may offer a certain efficiency and reduce the expense of putting police in the field, it raises significant concerns about the due process rights of car owners who receive tickets through this technology.

A state law passed in 2009 in Maryland provided guidelines for cities and towns using traffic cameras. After several years of declining revenues, Takoma Park has seen an increase as a result of the cameras. From July 2009 to June 2010, the city reportedly received $1.28 million in net revenue from camera-based traffic fines. That number decreased to just under $900,000 the following year, but has remained a consistent money-maker. It recently added a sixth camera.

One of the city's cameras caught enough alleged violations to cause the city to issue 2,889 citations between October 1 and November 22 of this year. One police officer is assigned to review images captured by the cameras. Of the 2,889 images captured in that period, the officer rejected 192 of them. Each citation represents a $40 fine to the driver.

Individual fines for traffic violations allegedly captured by traffic cameras are small compared to more serious criminal penalties. Alleged traffic violations can have broader consequences, however. Aside from a relatively small fine, traffic violations can affect auto insurance premiums and even eligibility for insurance. Certain professions may require a clean driving records. A false accusation of a traffic violation based on a digital image captured remotely can have significant potential impact.

A core right guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution in a criminal matter is the right of a defendant to confront his or her accuser. This right is enshrined in the Sixth Amendment. The use of traffic cameras, and the act of basing citations on videos or still images captured remotely, eliminates much of a defendant's ability to challenge the state's account of the alleged crime. Ordinarily, if challenged, a police officer would have to explain the justification for a traffic stop, and a defendant would have an opportunity not only to cross-examine the officer but to evaluate the functionality of the radar gun and other technology used in the traffic stop. Now a defendant may not even know of the citation until days or weeks later.

Continue reading "Traffic Cameras Raise Revenues for Cities and Due Process Concerns for Drivers" »

Starting today, the Costa Mesa Police Department will no longer announce locations of upcoming checkpoints, one of which is planned from 6 p.m. to midnight tonight.

Sgt. Dave Makiyama stated the police will no longer announce these checkpoint locations in order to add to their deterrent factor. He believes the previous policy of naming the locations allowed people to avoid the checkpoints with little or no fear of apprehension.

The California Supreme Court case of People v. Banks ruled advance notice was not a requirement for a constitutionally valid checkpoint. However, it is one of the safeguards for a constitutionally permissible sobriety checkpoint. Courts have concluded a search warrant is not an unreasonable search.

Makiyama said "Hopefully, those who do learn of our checkpoints will question if they will be drinking and driving in the vicinity of a checkpoint and make good decisions about their rides."

Mayor Pro Tem Jim Righeimer points out most DUI arrests occur later at night and the 6 p.m. to midnight timeframe was chosen to give police officers extra overtime pay.

Discussion from The Law Office of Barney B. Gibbs:

I have always winced at the idea of DUI checkpoints. The thought of randomly stopping citizens to "educate" them about what is generally a misdemeanor seems, to me, to be an unreasonable and unnecessary extension of government power. With an arrest rate of 1/5 of 1% of traffic stopped, there cannot be a valid argument of success for these roadblocks. When compared to the inconvenience to 99% of the people, the whole roadblock system looks questionable.

What DUI roadblocks give to police officers is the probable cause to stop vehicles they normally couldn't and conduct investigations they normally shouldn't. In all likelihood, patrol officers on their own have a higher success rate than roadblocks.

Maybe Mayor Pro Tem Righeimer is right. Perhaps there is a hidden purpose to modifying this already unproductive and inconvenient procedure.

A Wednesday night hit-and-run collision, which resulted in a bicyclist being critically injured, has resulted in an arrest.

*CVC Sections 20001 and 20000 states: "The driver of a vehicle involved in an accident resulting in injury to a person, other than himself or herself, or in the death of a person shall immediately stop the vehicle at the scene of the accident and shall fulfill the requirements of Sections 20003 and 20004."

*CVC Section 20003 states: "The driver of any vehicle involved in an accident resulting in injury to or death of any person shall also give his or her name, current residence address, the names and current residence addresses of any occupants of the driver's vehicle injured in the accident, the registration number of the vehicle he or she is driving, and the name and current residence address of the owner to the person struck or the driver or occupants of any vehicle collided with, and shall give the information to any traffic or police officer at the scene of the accident. The driver also shall render to any person injured in the accident reasonable assistance, including transporting, or making arrangements for transporting, any injured person to a physician, surgeon, or hospital for medical or surgical treatment if it is apparent that treatment is necessary or if that transportation is requested by any injured person."

Many people think an individual charged with a hit-and-run, resulting in property damage or personal injury, first committed a crime or some traffic violation and then fled. Although this happens, the fact is the crime of hit-and-run occurs after the accident. A person may not be guilty of any law violation...it is possible to be equally at fault or not at fault at all in the accident and still be charged with a hit-and-run if he/she leaves the scene and does not follow the law regarding reporting.

A California appellate court overturned a drug conviction because peace officers searched a man's vehicle solely for the purpose of looking for contraband.

Originally, the defendant was pulled over for a minor traffic infraction and not having a valid California driver's license. The officers decided to impound the vehicle and, upon conducting an inventory search, 12 ounces of methamphetamine was discovered. Deputies later searched the defendant's residence pursuant to a warrant and found additional contraband.

What is interesting about this case is, even though this is a pretext stop (the officer testified he was told by a narcotics officer to find probable cause to stop the defendant in order to conduct the search), there was independent probable cause for the stop.

The main issue in this case was whether there was a valid community caretaking function behind impounding the defendant's car. If the vehicle would be subject to vandalism or impedes traffic, the impound would serve a valid community caretaking function. However, when the impound is a mere ruse, this does not exist. The subjective intent of the peace officer must be considered. Objective intent is the normal standard for search and seizure issues. In the end, the court ruled that since the officers' subjective intent was to stop the defendant so that they could impound his vehicle in order to conduct a search for contraband, no community caretaking function existed.

One person was arrested for driving under the influence when Irvine police conducted a DUI checkpoint recently. Out of 301 stopped vehicles, 5 sobriety tests were performed.

What is interesting about these numbers is not that only 1 person out of 301 stopped was arrested for drunken driving, but that 4 sober people were given sobriety tests. Given these numbers, the police were right 20% of the time about the need to do a field sobriety test. Not a very high ranking for individuals who are trained to make these observations.

To anyone who has traveled in Southern California, traffic jams are a part of everyday life. The traffic jam Northern China is now experiencing, however, dwarfs anything Southern California has ever seen. The traffic jam, nearly 60 miles long and expected to last almost 3 weeks, has had some motorists stuck in their cars for 5 days. The truly amazing thing about this mammoth gridlock is the lack of violent road rage. No assaults, batteries, domestic violence or even theft incidences have been reported. I shudder to think what would have happened had this occurred in L.A.