Ticket help (options)

[BMW]

My wife is an awesome driver; however she has been quite unlucky lately. She got her first ever ticket a few months ago and then a second ticket recently. Here are the details of the recent ticket:

1. CVC 21755
2. Novato
3. 4runner with off-road tires (ticket says highlander :|)
4. The officer said the passenger rear tire went over solid white line before making a right turn. (Entering the bike lane with one tire)
5. My wife said, "I'm preggo and not feeling well"
6. This was in "downtown" Novato. She was traveling on a two lane road approaching a traffic signal. The light turned red and there were two cars in front of her. All the cars came to a stop and she needed to make a right. She saw the dashed line where she could legally (?) enter the bike lane before turning right at the light after a full stop. There was plenty of paved surface between the car first in line and curb. The lanes are very wide at this location.

My questions are the following:
-the cvc suggests she went off the pavement which didn't happen. Do you expert Leo's think I should contest this ticket? I'm all for paying tickets we deserve but this one seems silly.
-there must be a cvc for entering the bike lane. I wonder why that code wasn't used?
-how long will I be paying higher car insurance rates? 3 years until the point goes away?

Thanks for taking the time to read this. Any input is greatly appreciated. :cool

 

[KrustyKruser]

21755. (a) The driver of a vehicle may overtake and pass another
vehicle upon the right only under conditions permitting that movement
in safety. In no event shall that movement be made by driving off
the paved or main-traveled portion of the roadway.
(b) This section does not prohibit the use of a bicycle in a
bicycle lane or on a shoulder.

Could you post up a google earth picture of the intersection? I think as long as you can show your 4runner could have stayed on pavement you would have a case.

 

[horsepower]

How does the right rear tire go over the line without the front right going over too?

 

[BMW]

How does the right rear tire go over the line without the front right going over too?

No kidding huh? I remember him saying that clearly. Maybe that is all that was visible to him at that time.

 

[BMW]

Could you post up a google earth picture of the intersection? I think as long as you can show your 4runner could have stayed on pavement you would have a case.

Honestly I think he might be a barfer so I'm not sure that's a good idea if I decide to contest it. :laughing

In all seriousness there is no doubt that it can fit legally with 10ft on either side. Which is why I am confused about the cvc on the ticket. Maybe he was doing us a favor by not mentioning entering the bike lane?

 

[horsepower]

My wife is an awesome driver; however she has been quite unlucky lately. She got her first ever ticket a few months ago and then a second ticket recently. Here are the details of the recent ticket:

1. CVC 21755

My questions are the following:
-the cvc suggests she went off the pavement which didn't happen.

The CVC suggests that she went off the mainly travelled portion of the road, not necessarily pavement. Read it again.
You now need to explore and film whether that type of turn happens 100s of times a day at that intersection and then perhaps argue that that therefore is a mainly travelled portion, equal to the other mainly travelled lanes. Certainly this type of turn occurs every day...a legal paved lane easement of sorts.
However, I'd omit mentioning the size of her tires or preggers and not feeling well in a TbD and focus on the CVC and details of the road instead.

 

[BMW]

.
However, neither the size of her tires nor preggers and not feeling well will bode well with the judge as an excuse.

I know. I wasn't mentioning the tires as an excuse. I was just bummed my 4runner was mistaken for a highlander.

 

[KrustyKruser]

21717. Whenever it is necessary for the driver of a motor vehicle
to cross a bicycle lane that is adjacent to his lane of travel to
make a turn, the driver shall drive the motor vehicle into the
bicycle lane prior to making the turn and shall make the turn
pursuant to Section 22100.

I believe this is the section allowing use of bicycle lanes. I thought it also included that you must use the bike lane for a right turn and that you were limited to 200 feet. Guess I need to brush up on my CVC code.

DISCLAIMER: none of this will be used for court purposes. We are here to help, not get your info and screw you. I expect all the LEO's here to adhere to this disclaimer please.

I would only hope that the officer would refrain from getting involved if he planned to use this forum against you.

 

[BMW]

^ that's what I was looking for. I drove by the intersection and the dashed line as the bike lane gets close to the intersection seems shorter than 200 feet.

Thanks for your help!

Interesting disclaimer. I still have trepidation about posting the exact location.

 

[MX500]

Contest the ticket in writing. Much easier for us, more paperwork for LEO, and he/she wont get OT for a court appearance. They are more likely to drop it through the written contesting method.

 

[KrustyKruser]

21209. (a) No person shall drive a motor vehicle in a bicycle lane
established on a roadway pursuant to Section 21207 except as follows:
(1) To park where parking is permitted.
(2) To enter or leave the roadway.
(3) To prepare for a turn within a distance of 200 feet from the
intersection.
(b) This section does not prohibit the use of a motorized bicycle
in a bicycle lane, pursuant to Section 21207.5, at a speed no greater
than is reasonable or prudent, having due regard for visibility,
traffic conditions, and the condition of the roadway surface of the
bicycle lane, and in a manner which does not endanger the safety of
bicyclists.

Ok. I believe this is the section I was thinking of. Now I can finally get some sleep.

 

[KrustyKruser]

How does the right rear tire go over the line without the front right going over too?

Rear wheel cheat... Gets me every time when I drive my pop's dodge duallie.

 

[BMW]

^ you crack me up dude. Thanks again for your help.

 

[LongGoneJohn]

Cite CVC 21209 and that per 21755 you were not off the main portion, as people use the last 200ft to turn right on a regular basis.

21755 is used more commonly when someone drives on the SHOULDER to pass cars.

Chance of winning? Better than 50% IMO.

 

[bojangle]

Cite CVC 21209 and that per 21755 you were not off the main portion, as people use the last 200ft to turn right on a regular basis.

21755 is used more commonly when someone drives on the SHOULDER to pass cars.

Chance of winning? Better than 50% IMO.

I second that advice! :thumbup

 

[sidewazzz]

Someone else already posted it... but your answer is 200 feet to the turn you can use the bike lane. Unless the two cars you state were 100 feet apart this is an easy ticket to have dismissed.

 

[jayescee]

Contest the ticket in writing. Much easier for us, more paperwork for LEO, and he/she wont get OT for a court appearance. They are more likely to drop it through the written contesting method.

LEOs do get OT for it.

 

[NorCalBusa]

LEOs do get OT for it.

Sometimes. If court is during a normally scheduled shift- then no. If on a day/day part where they are off duty- then sure.

 

[jayescee]

Sometimes. If court is during a normally scheduled shift- then no. If on a day/day part where they are off duty- then sure.

Oh. Alright. Totally didn't know that since all I've been seeing is that LEOs get OT no matter what. Thanks for the info :thumbup

 

[MX500]

That came out sideways. I was saying doing it in writing makes more BS and does not require a court appearance, which would reduce the chance of the LEO getting any OT for their response to the dispute.

Ticketassassin.com iirc is a decent resource.