TRAFFIC Category Archives — Page 6 of 8 — New York Criminal Attorney Blog Published by White Plains, New York Criminal Defense Lawyers

NEW YORK TRAFFIC TICKETS GET HARDER TO FIGHT

June 14, 2009 | Jasmine Hernandez

A recent change in New York Vehicle & Traffic Law sec. 1806 will make it much harder to fight traffic tickets in New York State. Prior to New York April 7, 2009, New York law made it clear that in most cases a person should only have to appear one time to fight a routine traffic infraction such as speeding, unsafe lane change or failure to signal. The Vehicle & Traffic Law made it clear that upon receipt of a “not guilty” plea from a motorist the Court was required to schedule the matter for a trial. On the trial date the motorist could plea bargain or proceed to trial. Judges who violated this rule faced sanctions from the Commission on Judicial Conduct. The Commission found that judges that set cases down for a “pre-trial” conference rather than trial were putting an unnecessary burden on motorists who would then feel coerced to plead guilty rather than appear in Court multiple times for a rather routine matter.

Well, the New York State Legislature and Governor decided that coercion was the best way to resolve New York traffic tickets and have now amended the Vehicle & Traffic Law to require Courts to send motorists an “appearance” date rather than a “trial” date. This law seems to require motorists to appear a minimum of two times to fight their traffic tickets.

Since New York State Troopers are not permitted to plea bargain their tickets and many localities do not have prosecutors to handle those tickets, we have to wonder both what the purpose is of holding such a Court appearance? and what would happen at that appearance?

New York Traffic Offenses Get More Expensive

June 7, 2009 | Tilem & Associates

New York State traffic offenses such as speeding tickets, DWI’s, Driving with a Suspended License and other driving infractions and crimes are getting more expensive. New York State already imposes surcharges totaling $85 for any traffic infraction over and above any fine. The total Surcharge is $80 in City Courts. However, the law imposed a cap, or maximum surcharge of $100 per incident which meant that if a motorist was convicted of multiple tickets the maximum surcharge could be $100. In a memo sent to all New York State City, Town and Village Courts, the Office of Court Administration has notified the Courts that effective for New York Vehicle and Traffic Law (VTL) offenses committed after July 6, 2009, the cap for mandatory surcharges was raised to $180.

The calculations are complex because over the years, as a way to increase revenue, New York has imposed an increasing number of fees on all types of convictions especially traffic violations. For example the $85 surcharge imposed on a routine traffic infraction such as speeding or passing a red light actually includes a $55 mandatory surcharge, a $5 crime victim assistance fee, a $5 town and village fee if the conviction is not in a City Court, and a $20 additional surcharge. The new $180 cap only applies to the mandatory surcharge and crime victim assistance fee. So if you are convicted of 10 routine traffic infractions, the surcharges will total $180 (the “cap”), plus $200 (the $20 additional surcharge 10 times) plus $50 (the town and village fee 10 times).

A conviction for a DWI can cost $400 just in surcharges. That’s excluding the fine of between $500 and $1000. Even a conviction for Driving While Ability Impaired by Alcohol, a traffic infraction, carries surcharges of $260. Additionally, suspension lift fees (suspension termination fees) have gone up from $35 to $70 and the cap on these fees has doubled to $400.

POLICE STEP UP SEAT BELT ENFORCEMENT

May 18, 2009 | Jasmine Hernandez

Local, County and New York State Police begin their annual “click it or ticket” campaign today which means an increase in seat belt tickets across the State and the Region. The increased enforcement will take the forms of patrols and checkpoints and will likely lead to an increase in traffic tickets of all kinds. In addition to the New York State Police, County and local police in Westchester, Rockland, Orange Counties and beyond are expected to participate. The program is scheduled to last two weeks.

While Seat belt violations in New York carry no points and a fine of $50, it is important to remember that no seat belt or child restraint for a child less than 16 years of age carries 3 points per violation in New York. In addition, Police will be looking for other violations such as speeding, unsafe lane change, failure to signal and equipment violations as they patrol so drive carefully.
If you receive a traffic summons contact us DrSUMMONS.com or 877-DRSUMMONS

ARE YOU ENTITLED TO A SUPPORTING DEPOSITION WHEN ISSUED A NEW YORK TRAFFIC TICKET?

May 3, 2009 | Tilem & Associates

Unless your New York Traffic Ticket was issued in New York City, Buffalo and parts of Suffolk County you are entitled as a matter of law to a supporting deposition on all moving violations (including: speeding, red lights, tailgating, unsafe lane change and failure to signal) . You must however, ask for it.

As experienced New York traffic court lawyers, demanding a supporting deposition from the complainant/police officer is one of many tools in our arsenal to help us successfully fight traffic violations. While it is clearly not the right tactic in every case, it can be an effective, although procedurally difficult tactic.

New York Criminal Procedure Law § 100.25(2) provides that a defendant charged by a simplified information is, upon a timely request, entitled as a matter of right to a supporting deposition of a complainant police officer and that upon such a request, a court must order the officer to serve a copy of the same within 30 days of the date such request is received by the court, or at least five days before trial, whichever is earlier. N.Y. CPL § 100.25(2).

NASSAU COUNTY ANNOUNCES INITIATIVE TARGETING AGGRESSIVE DRIVERS

April 26, 2009 | Jasmine Hernandez

Nassau County Police have announced an initiative targeting “aggressive drivers” on Nassau County roads, beginning tomorrow. While details of the initiative have not been released the program is likely to result in the issuance of additional tickets for such New York traffic violations as speeding, tailgating, passing a red light, unsafe lane change, failure to signal, unsafe passing, the failure to obey traffic control devices and failure to yield right of way in Nassau County.

These types of violations all carry points and can lead to higher insurance costs as well as fines and imposition of the driver responsibility assessment. Nassau County traffic violations are handled in the Traffic and Parking Violations Agency (TPVA) which is located at 16 Cooper Street in Hempstead
If you have any questions about fighting traffic violations in Nassau County or anywhere else in New York contact us or visit us at drsummons.com or 877-DR-SUMMONS (377-8666).

NEW YORK TRAFFIC TICKETS – YET ANOTHER REASON WHY OFFICERS/TROOPERS SHOULD NOT PROSECUTE THEIR OWN CASES

April 20, 2009 | Tilem & Associates

Several months back I wrote a series of blogs about officers and troopers prosecuting New York traffic tickets they issue. As an experienced New York Traffic Court attorney, I wrote about why this practice should not be allowed. Recently, I had an experience in one particular Dutchess County court which reaffirms my belief that officers and troopers should not be masquerading as prosecutors.

Simply stated, police officers and state troopers should not act as prosecutors because they operate with no regard for the disciplinary and ethical rules that guide attorney conduct or those acting as attorneys under one of the exceptions promulgated by the legislature. Furthermore, I have personally witnessed State Troopers blatantly violating their own internal rules. I have personally witnessed the questionable (if not outright illegal) practice of State Troopers, with firearms at their side, calling defendants out into the hallway for a “conference”. Like a prison yard roll-call, these troopers turned “prosecutors” call out: “Smith, Jones, Johnson and Lopez, outside in the hall”. Then, with 9mm firearms visible on their sides these troopers turned “prosecutors” “advise” the hapless motorists to plead guilty but to tell the judge they were only going 10 mph over the limit. The troopers turned “prosecutors” then promise that they won’t object to the judge finding them guilty of a lesser speed.

The trooper practice of advising the defendants to plead guilty is border-line criminal. Even if this court were to rule that troopers can act as prosecutors, that does not mean that those troopers can call defendants into the hallway and give them legal advice. (See Jud. Law 478 & 484). This is misdemeanor (See Jud. Law 485). The State Police have a no-plea policy. What then, could they possibly want to talk to the defendant about? There is a no plea policy, right. That means the troopers show up for trial, period.

NEW YORK SPEEDING TICKET – CAN ONE EXCEED THE SPEED LIMIT TO AVOID A COLLISION?

February 23, 2009 | Tilem & Associates

Experienced New York traffic ticket lawyers know that generally, there are two possible defenses when one is charged with speeding in New York: (1) “I wasn’t speeding”; or (2) “I was speeding but I have an excuse”. (Keep in mind however, there is a third strategy which is not a defense and that is, “I was speeding but the officer can’t prove it”. The “they can’t prove it” strategy will be the subject of future blogs).

With regard to excuses, motorists issued speeding tickets come up with any number of excuses to justify why they were exceeding the speed limit. Generally, unless you have a verifiable pregnant woman in the car or an assailant with a gun to your head, you have no legal excuse. However, at least one court has held that exceeding the speed limit to avoid a suddenly slowing vehicle constitutes a sufficient “emergency” to absolve the motorist of a speeding charge.

In People v. Cataldo, 65 Misc.2d 286, 316 N.Y.S.2d 873, a 1970 case out of the Suffolk County First District Court, J. Colaneri found a motorist not guilty of speeding where the evidence showed that the motorist accelerated to avoid a vehicle that was “rapidly slowing down”. In so ruling, J. Colaneri relied upon the “emergency” justification defense found in Penal Law sec. 35.05(2) which states, in sum and substance, that criminal conduct in not criminal when it is necessary to avoid a public or private injury which is about to occur through no fault of the actor (i.e. the defendant did not cause the emergency situation). In Cataldo, J. Coleneri found that the defendant/motorist was justified in speeding to avoid colliding with the “rapidly slowing” vehicle.

New York Speeding – Don’t Get Caught Below The Speed Limit

February 2, 2009 | Tilem & Associates

A New York driver must drive at a “reasonable and prudent speed” and reduce his or her speed below the posted speed limit when necessary to do so. Notwithstanding the posted speed limit, you still must drive at a speed that is reasonable and prudent (VTL 1180(a)). Therefore, even if the posted speed limit is 65 mph, you must nevertheless reduce your speed if say for example, it is raining or foggy. Furthermore, you must also reduce your speed at a railroad crossing, when approaching and crossing an intersection, when you go over the crest of a hill, on winding roads, when a special hazard exists with respect to pedestrians or if weather or highway conditions require a reduced speed (See VTL 1180(c)). These statutes have been held constitutional. See People v. Lewis, 13 N.Y.2d 180, 245 N.Y.S.2d 1, 194 N.E.2d 831 (1963); People v. Nappi, 18 N.Y.2d 136, 272 N.Y.S.2d 347 (1966).

If you have been issued a speeding ticket anywhere in New York State including White Plains, New Rochelle, Harrison, Yonkers, Greenburgh or any other jurisdiction in New York State call Tilem & Associates at 1-877-DR-SUMMONS (1-877-377-8666) or visit www.DrSummons.com, www.TrafficTicketExpress.com, www.WhitePlainsSpeedingTicket.com, or www.HarrisonSpeedingTicket.com.

ITS ILLEGAL TO SELL USED AIRBAGS IN NEW YORK

January 31, 2009 | Tilem & Associates

In New York and elsewhere, it’s common for brake parts to be replaced with rebuilt parts. For example, it’s common for garages to install rebuilt brake calipers, brake pads and shoes, master cylinders and power brake boosters. Furthermore, when repairing or maintaining brakes on trucks, its also common to use rebuilt air compressors and brake valves. Therefore, the most important system on any vehicle, the braking system, is routinely repaired and maintained with re-built or refurbished parts. Many times, the parts to be rebuilt (the “cores”) are obtained from salvage yards (junkyards).

However, the New York State Legislature, in its infinite wisdom, has found it necessary to bar the installation of salvaged airbag systems (called inflatable restraint systems under New York law). Effective March 1, 1999, airbag systems in New York may only be replaced with new systems or salvaged systems which have been certified pursuant to standards set by a nationally recognized testing, engineering and research organization (See VTL § 398-d(6)(e) & 415-c (2)).

Here’s the problem with this law; leave it to the New York State Legislature to pass a law requiring salvaged airbag systems to meet standards set by a nationally recognized testing, engineering and research organization when no such standards or organization to develop such standards exist. And, leave it to the New York Court of Appeals to hold that the failure of the Department of Motor Vehicles to develop such standards did not invalidate the law. N.Y.A.A.D., Inc. v. State of New York, 1 N.Y.3d 245, 771 N.Y.S.2d 54 (N.Y. 2003)

TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT ON THE INCREASE

January 5, 2009 | Jasmine Hernandez

A January 1, 2009 article on MSN.com confirms what many New Yorkers have already found out the hard way; that enforcement of traffic laws is on the increase in large part to raise money for state and local government.

The article confirmed some disturbing trends already observed by the New York traffic court attorneys here at Tilem & Campbell. That much of traffic enforcement is motivated by the desire of government to raise revenue but is also urged by insurance companies eager to raise revenues by increasing premiums on drivers who are convicted of routine traffic offenses.

New York is mentioned in the article because of the recent announcement that New York City will hire 200 additional traffic enforcement agents but the article suggest the national nature of this trend by citing examples from Massachusetts, Colorado, Detroit and Arizona, to name a few places.