Three Southern California cities are taking steps to rid themselves of red light cameras. In Westminster, the city council decided unanimously on Wednesday to ask voters to ban the use of red light cameras in a referendum scheduled for November 2012.
“We gave very clear instructions… to city managers that this red light camera system will not be discussed or considered to be installed in any part of our city,” Councilman Andy Quach said on Wednesday. “Tonight is basically a reiteration of that already existing policy…. The council has historically never liked anything that could be considered monitoring its citizens by Big Brother.”
The highest court in Massachusetts believes there is no due process problem with charging motorists $300 to challenge a $5 or $15 parking ticket. On Thursday, the Supreme Judicial Court ruled that the appeal procedures in the city of Northampton satisfied constitutional requirements even though motorists were denied an in-person hearing to contest the legitimacy of a citation. The city only allowed people either to pay the fine in full or send “a signed statement explaining his objections.”
Beginning December 1, North Carolina will join Australia in having laws on the book mandating the seizure of vehicles for certain speeding offenses. On June 23, Governor Bev Perdue (R) signed the “Run and You’re Done” bill into law which authorizes a county sheriff to take and hold the car of anyone accused — not convicted — of speeding away from a police officer. The state House and Senate passed the measure unanimously.
Under the new law, the confiscation becomes permanent if a judge believes the car or motorcycle was used to elude a police officer while speeding more than 15 MPH over the limit with at least one other aggravating factor, such as having someone under 12 years old in the vehicle or the vehicle was at some point in a highway work zone, regardless of whether any workers are present.
In 1998, South Carolina lawmakers mandated that police use dashboard mounted cameras to document the arrest of anyone arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI). The state supreme court on Monday ruled that the town of Mount Pleasant was not in compliance with this statute, which states a suspect “must have his conduct at the incident site and the breath test site video recorded.”
Police are not alone in the ability to secretly use GPS devices to track someone without his knowledge, the New Jersey Superior Court’s Appellate Division ruled Thursday. A three-judge panel made this decision in the context of a privacy invasion suit brought by Kenneth R. Villanova against Innovative Investigations Inc after his now ex-wife hired the private-eye company to spy on him. She intended to document alleged infidelities prior to filing for divorce in May 2008. At the firm’s suggestion, Villanova’s wife installed the tracking device on her husband’s GMC Yukon-Denali which followed the vehicle’s every move for forty days.
Since 1994, the California courts have banned defendants from using scientific evidence to challenge certain charges for driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI). To foil defense attorneys who had become increasingly successful with juries, the state created a “per se” DUI charge that made it a crime to have 0.08 reading on a breathalyzer machine regardless of whether an individual was actually drunk or had a 0.08 percent blood alcohol content (BAC) level. Because of physiological variability among individuals, some people with the same blood alcohol level might read higher or lower on the breath machine. Challenges based on these differences are known as “partition ratio” arguments. The California Court of Appeal on Friday loosened what had become effectively a ban on scientific criticism of breathalyzer reliability.
[Editor’s note: My take on the IIHS study’s shortcomings can be found here]
The public relations arm of the insurance industry yesterday released a report claiming red light cameras are popular in big cities. About 24 hours after Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) had begun spinning this study to media outlets, only a handful had run stories. Editors at one daily publication told TheNewspaper that they passed on writing about a claim they did not find credible.
Opponents of automated ticketing machines in Monroe, Washington have turned to a new tactic in battling a city council that refuses to give up the use of red light cameras and speed cameras. Instead of engaging the city and a wealthy traffic camera company in a costly legal battle, the group BanCams.com decided Wednesday to shame the council at every election until officials follow the public will.
The Louisiana Supreme Court on Friday gave a green light to police officers looking to search automobiles without a warrant. The court ruled on an interim appeal in the ongoing trial of Derrick R. Kirton, 30, and Crystal N. Strate, 27, who were charged on February 23 with distribution and possession of heroin, respectively. A judge in the Orleans Parish Criminal District Court had ruled that the police search of Kirton’s vehicle was unlawful because it was not based on probable cause. The prosecution appealed.
In a decision that has wide-ranging implications for photo enforcement, speeding tickets and driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI) charges, the US Supreme Court yesterday reconfirmed the Sixth Amendment right to confront one’s accuser applies to analysts who claim to have certified evidence from a machine. The 5-4 decision concluded that “stand-in” expert witnesses are not a substitute for the individuals who actually conducted the tests. The decision broadens the applicability of the landmark Melendez-Diaz ruling from 2009, which has already led to appellate division cases in four California counties to throw out red light camera evidence.
Although red light camera supporters insist the programs enjoy broad support among the public, traffic camera companies are taking extraordinary measures to block ballot measures that would gauge public sentiment on the issue. Anti-photo enforcement initiatives are meeting corporate opposition in five cities in Washington state while American Traffic Solutions (ATS) is moving to reinstate red light camera use rejected by a majority of Houston, Texas residents. Albuquerque, New Mexico appears to be the only city with an unopposed referendum vote in play. (Read More…)
Louisiana lawmakers came close to enacting legislation that would have confiscated vehicles driven by people accused of littering. The bill failed in the House 49 to 46 on Monday after having cleared the state Senate last week by a 34 to 1 vote. Had two state representatives switched their votes, the measure would have been sent to the governor.
The US Supreme Court on Friday ruled that evidence from an objectively unconstitutional automobile search can still be admissible in court as long as the search took place prior to court decisions that recognized stronger protections in the Fourth Amendment. Specifically, the April 2009 decision in the case Arizona v. Gant overturned prior precedent and required police to get a warrant to search a car when an arrested suspect posed no realistic threat to officer safety (view ruling). Willie Davis was arrested over two years earlier in Greenville, Alabama when that rule did not apply.
American Traffic Solutions (ATS) on Friday advanced toward its goal of reactivating the red light cameras to Houston, Texas. A majority of voters demanded in a November ballot vote that the cameras be taken down, but US District Court for the Southern District of Texas Judge Lynn N. Hughes believes the people had no right to vote.
The ruling was a major victory for the legal strategy of ATS General Counsel George Hittner, who worked with the Houston city attorney to create a lawsuit in which city officials, who want the cameras back, sued ATS, which also wants the cameras back. The case was not filed in state court, which would be the proper venue. Instead, Hittner had the case filed in the federal courthouse where his father happens to serve.
Some Florida are beginning to regret jumping on the red light camera bandwagon without bothering to wait for state legislative approval. On Wednesday, the Pembroke Pines city commission voted to approve a settlement with attorney Jason D. Weisser who filed a lawsuit against a number of towns that began automated ticketing before state law was changed last July to allow automated ticketing.
Recent Comments