VC 23123a violation

[So Cal Camaro]

Originally Posted by 130R

^That's interesting, but as the person who responded right after me, it can be beat. If this law is THAT strict, then adjusting your stereo or air conditioning could be considered distracted driving.

I don't know how Steven Spriggs plead his case, but he must not have done a very good job. Let's face it, every day speeders get cases dismissed, drunk drivers get cases dismissed, and at the same time, many that commit the same offense don't. How a case is presented is a BIG factor. Have you ever sat in on a traffic court proceeding? Pretty darn funny...

No-where in the law, nor in the article is there any mention of having the car in park.

Again, the spirit of the law, and the wording of the law in regards to the term 'using', make it a winnable case under the circumstances of the OP. IMHO naturally...

The only opinion that will matter is the Judge's...and yes, you sometimes get lucky...

[90503]

Originally Posted by 130R

^That's interesting, but as the person who responded right after me, it can be beat. If this law is THAT strict, then adjusting your stereo or air conditioning could be considered distracted driving.

I don't know how Steven Spriggs plead his case, but he must not have done a very good job. Let's face it, every day speeders get cases dismissed, drunk drivers get cases dismissed, and at the same time, many that commit the same offense don't. How a case is presented is a BIG factor. Have you ever sat in on a traffic court proceeding? Pretty darn funny...

No-where in the law, nor in the article is there any mention of having the car in park.

Again, the spirit of the law, and the wording of the law in regards to the term 'using', make it a winnable case under the circumstances of the OP. IMHO naturally...

Distracted driving has always been a violation. The whole list is on a citation...eating, drinking, etc., etc. But the cell-phone laws are a different animal....whether you are distracted by it or not, it's simple use of being in your hand is a violation. Don't think you'll get out of a ticket by saying what about this, or what about that....It's a separate hands free cell phone violation...

[HmBuilder2]

Op got busted for using cell phone, Pay the fine and move on....

[RiCorvette]

FTR, I didn't do it; IOW, it was someone else. lol.

Lawyers lose cases all the time - even their own. Having a Law Degree does not mean
one can always present an effective case.

I'm inclined to advise a fight (trial by written declaration); A reasonable doubt needs to be offered:
9:40 at night, no traffic, no delay in moving once the light changed.
The INTENT of the law was not violated.

[Falundir]

Originally Posted by Ricamaro

FTR, I didn't do it; IOW, it was someone else. lol.

Lawyers lose cases all the time - even their own. Having a Law Degree does not mean
one can always present an effective case.

I'm inclined to advise a fight (trial by written declaration); A reasonable doubt needs to be offered:
9:40 at night, no traffic, no delay in moving once the light changed.
The INTENT of the law was not violated.

You will irritate any judge if you attempt to argue the intent of the law in this case.

It is like target shooting next to a preschool. Just because you were not aiming in the same direction as the school does not mean you didn't violate the letter of the law of illegal discharge of a firearm.

As for reasonable doubt, this is primarily for jury trials. Bench trials have more flexibility. Even if you went in that direction, your only approach would be to say that the officer mistook your actions as utilizing a cell phone when in reality you were doing X. Since you admitted to doing this activity, that would be perjury, even in a written declaration. That and what is your credibility vs the officer?

Best advice I can give is to:

-Show up on date of ticket
-Appologize profusely for use of the device and state that you are aware that ignorance of the law is not an excuse, but now that you know it is against the law you are aware and will not repeat this behavior.
-Request traffic school
-Request reduction in fine

--edit-- If you do choose to fight, do not mention the officer's behavior in the declaration. If they were being an ass and you call them out on it in the trial, it will only irritate the judge. Their behavior has no bearing on if you were or were not conducting illegal activity.

[RiCorvette]

In response to post # 19;

ARGUING with Officialdom is usually never a good idea, at any level.


Presenting one's side with reason and logic and acknowledging that an error was made, vowing to never re-offend and asking for the mercy of the court is generally a better course of action.

I have noticed that Trial by Written Declaration seem to have better success - maybe the LEOs and Court don't
have an inclination to spend much time on them.

In any event, it's a 50/50 crap shoot and either the the Citation will stand or be dismissed. Not fighting is a sure loss, offering a lame excuse is a sure loss, presenting a reasonable case is 50/50, but at least there is a chance of winning...
although, in today's dismal budgetary clime, all bets are off since the state is hungry for money.

[90503]

Originally Posted by Ricamaro

In response to post # 19;

ARGUING with Officialdom is usually never a good idea, at any level.


Presenting one's side with reason and logic and acknowledging that an error was made, vowing to never re-offend and asking for the mercy of the court is generally a better course of action.

I have noticed that Trial by Written Declaration seem to have better success - maybe the LEOs and Court don't
have an inclination to spend much time on them.

In any event, it's a 50/50 crap shoot and either the the Citation will stand or be dismissed. Not fighting is a sure loss, offering a lame excuse is a sure loss, presenting a reasonable case is 50/50, but at least there is a chance of winning...
although, in today's dismal budgetary clime, all bets are off since the state is hungry for money.

Let us know how it turns out.....Good luck!

[Bluffen]

Listen you all no one likes getting a ticket and ALL cops are A holes for giving them right?
Texting and driving is very very dangerous and I think its a good law. Talking on the phone well most cars have bluetooths built in these days so it really isnt a big issue. Do you know you can get a ticket for eating in the car while driving and technically holding a beverage.
Written declarations is a tool people use to use because if the LEO didnt respond it was dismissed. Most stations now have a clerk that handles these and makes sure you turn yours in or its to the captains office you go. and about missing court thats a day off so most cops go.
just obey the laws if you get caught you pay, man up..but if its a BS ticket I say fight it because I have seen chippies stretch the truth.

[Edzo]

In Massachusetts, it's illegal to TEXT and drive but the law says nothing against dialing while driving. Get pulled over?, "I wasn't texting, I was dialing!" That's how smart MA lawmakers are!

[Falundir]

Originally Posted by Edzo

In Massachusetts, it's illegal to TEXT and drive but the law says nothing against dialing while driving. Get pulled over?, "I wasn't texting, I was dialing!" That's how smart MA lawmakers are!

The laws greatly vary state to state. In some states it is permitted to use your gps on a mobile device. I travel for work so just ponied up for an actual GPS to not have to worry about it.

[90503]

Originally Posted by 130R

Just out of curiosity, where in this law, specifically does it say a cell phone cannot be used as a GPS device?

23123. (a) A person shall not drive a motor vehicle while using a wireless telephone unless that telephone is specifically designed and configured to allow hands-free listening and talking, and is used in that manner while driving.

I would think it's illegal because it's a hand held cell phone, that has a gps app....It's still a cell phone, and not hands free...

Dash-mounted, perhaps another story....

[90503]

Originally Posted by 130R

Don't think. Laws are written very specifically in an effort to limit how they may be interpreted. What wording in that law says using a cell phone as a GPS device is illegal?

Go back and read the original post. What specifically did the OP do that violated 23123 (a)? What wording in 23123 (a) supports your claim? Don't make your own assumptions about parking brakes and gear selection, use the wording of the law to defend your position...

23123. (a) A person shall not drive a motor vehicle while using a wireless telephone unless that telephone is specifically designed and configured to allow hands-free listening and talking, and is used in that manner while driving.

Not trying to argue with you....but the first line to me is very specific...

A person shall not drive a motor vehicle while using a wireless telephone....

Unless it is hands-free for talking....Using a cell phone for any app or whatever that is not hands-free is using a wireless telephone while driving, and a violation. It seems pretty cut and dried to me.

[90503]

Originally Posted by 130R

I don't see this as an argument at all. I see it as an interesting discussion. I'm not taking anything personally, and nor should anyone else...

IMO, you are very close to to seeing exactly how this law is to be interpreted. You just missed the last point about the cell phone being used "in that manner" & "while driving".

Was the OP using the cell phone as a communication device (listening and talking)?

Could be a quirk or two in there either way...My guess is the law was written before cell phones had all these apps and other features other than for conversations....I would think had the OP, or his friend, had their phone set up for hands free operation, using the gps app would not have been a violation...and the "intent" could also be extended to these apps, etc. that are not used hands free from a cell phone....that is the "intent" IMO of the law...don't be fiddling with those things in your hand while driving....conversation or gps app....

[zSHOWTIMEz]

Fight it , no need for a point on your license for looking at your phone for 1 second . If the cop doesn't show up go home happy wait 3 weeks for your bail refund if the cop does show up go apologize for making him come to court ask him to change the fine to a non moving traffic violation ask the judge of he could reduce the fine. Pay the fine go home kinda happy don't have to worry about paying higher insurance etc etc