Mannequin is speachless
A New York driver was pulled over for driving in a car pool lane with a dummy for a passenger. Her excuse to the officer was that “everybody does it”. What always amazes me when I read these stories is the lengths that some people will go through to save some extra time on the road. The police stated they stop about 2 people each year for this type of conduct.
Effective February 22, 2010, New York will make the following changes to its drivers license laws that will apply to teenage drivers. First, teen drivers will be required to increase the practice time behind the wheel from 20 hours to 50 hours which must include 15 hours of practice after sunset. Next, the changes will eliminate the limited use junior license and requires a junior (learners) permit to be held for at least six months before a junior or senior license may be issued. Finally, the new law will reduce from two to one the number of non-family passengers under 21 years old riding in a car being operated by a junior license holder when not accompianied by a licensed parent or guardian.
Info at http://nysdmv.com/broch/GDL2010.pdf
Sad news out of Morris, New York in Otsego County where 31 year old Trooper Jill Mattice was killed in a collision with a tractor-trailer. She was a six year veteran assigned to the Oneonta barracks. My thoughts and prayers to her family and collegues. Reportedly, she was the first female NY Trooper killed in the line of duty.
According to the preliminary investigation, Mattice was in the eastbound lane when for unknown reasons she crossed the center line at a slight curve in the road. Her car then sideswiped the westbound tractor-trailer, Troop C State Police Maj. Kevin C. Molinari said. It was also noted that police have not ruled out the possibility she may have been using her cell phone or texting at the time of the crash.
In my Traffic Law practice, I interact with NY Troopers on a regular basis. This is especially true in courts such as Stafford Town Court where the Troopers still prosecute their own tickets. To a person, with few exceptions, NY Troopers are professionals who put their lives on the line every day fro the protection of NY residents. While most of my clients see these men and women in an adversarial position - a ticket or an arrest - I respect the work of the Troopers.
This may be a new upstate New York record. A man from Greece, NY led local law enforcement on a thirteen minute chase where his vehicle was clocked at 110 mph in a residential area. Following his arrest, he was cited for 56 traffic violations.
Needless to say, he may not be driving in the near future. This translates into a large number of points on his DMV abstract and what will be a “hefty” fine.
Full story here thanks to 13WHAM.
Last Thursday, Gov. David Patterson (D) signed a Bill banning texting from hand-held devices while operating a motor vehicle. Starting November 1, 2009, this conduct will be penalized with a maximum fine of $150.00.
The dangers of such activity are clearly self-evident. The case that comes to my mind occurred several years ago when five high school cheerleaders from Fairport, NY were killed in a tragic accident with a tractor-trailer. The driver of the cheerleaders’ vehicle crossed the median and hit the truck head-on at high speed. It was suspected the high school aged driver had been texting (reading or writing) just prior to the collision.
In a study recently conducted by The Virginia Tech Transportation Institution, truckers sending text messages while driving are 23 times likelier to cause a crash or near-crash than truckers who are not texting, according to The New York Times. In light of these findings, the Governors Highway Safety Association is pushing the ban against texting while driving at the national level. This organization of state highway safety officials hope to “change the culture that has permitted distracted driving,” according to Vernon F. Betkey Jr., chairman of the association.
In Utah, causing an accident while texting is no longer considered an “accident”. It is on par with drunk driving, an act of willful negligence. Drivers who are pulled over for texting face steep fines. Drivers who are involved in accidents involving serious injury or death can face jail terms of up to 15 years.
Clearly, the New York state-wide ban is a good idea. As technology changes, so do the dangers when connected with other activities. Problems will remain convincing our younger drivers in the 16 to 25 year old range that this type of activity is dangerous. Early driver education will be crucial in this regard. Another problem is in the enforcement of the ban.
From a traffic law attorney’s perspective, the defense of such violations may be difficult. Most assistant District Attorneys I have cases with will not negotiate or reduce such violations because there are no “points” associated with the violations. An example is a ticket for talking on a hand-held device while driving. There are exceptions or defenses (ie. an emergency) but these are rare.
HTH, but YVMV.
Starting tomorrow, September 1, 2009, the New York Department of Motor Vehicles is raising basic fees as follows. The state registration for passenger vehicles rises from $44 to $55. The cost of a basic driver’s license or renewal (eight years) goes up 25% - from $50 to $62.50.
With its on-line renewal system, one might expect that these types of fees would actually decrease as the DMV becomes more efficient. New York is one of the highest taxed states in the country and these fees are just another tax on the privilege of driving in the Empire State.
New York State has recently approved a number of on-line course providers of Point and Insurance Reduction Programs (PIRP). These are listed by the NY DMV here. Successful completion requires 320 minutes of actual instruction time. Once completed, the driver is entitled to a 10% reduction for three years of the motorist’s liability, collision, and no-fault insurance premiums. Additionally, the completion of the program can be applied once within 18 months and will operate to reduce up to four points from the driver’s DMV abstract. It should be noted that the reduction will NOT remove violations, convictions or prevent/cancel a mandatory revocation or suspension for DWI, DWAI, or 3 speeding convictions within 18 months.
It should also be noted that the completion of the program will not have any effect on the Driver Assessment Fee that a motorist may have been assessed by the State. To illustrate, suppose a driver has amassed 8 points on her abstract in an 18 month period. She will pay $150.00 each year for 3 years to the DMV - in addition to the court fines and mandatory surcharge. Now, because she is only 3 points away from a future suspension (11 points), she successfully completes the PIRP. The driver will STILL have to pay the $150.00 each year to the DMV, but will be treated by the DMV as having only 4 points for license suspension purposes (8 less 4 point reduction from PIRP).
The offering of these on-line programs is great news for New York motorists who may need such benefits.
The New York State Troopers in Troop D, which patrols Central New York, have issued a whopping 30% more speeding tickets in 2009 when compared to 2008. Through the Freedom of Information Law, WSYR-TV9 of Syracuse analyzed the tickets issued by Troop D and found an increase of 6,400 tickets being issued in 2009 when compared to 2008. This increase includes:
12% more seat belt tickets;
15% more child restraint tickets;
27% more equipment violations.
Troop D Captain Jay Pristash stated that there are no quotas per se and that the increase in tickets being written is due to a new “traffic management” team of 10 troopers and one sergeant, who are directed to problem areas in the region.
Whatever the reason given for the increase, it is clear that the State benefits from the increase because each ticket carries a mandatory NYS surcharge of $85.00 - in addition to any fine that the Court will assess against the violator. So this increase of 6,400 tickets results in an additional revenue of $544,000 from this Troop.
With the increase of tickets being written all over New York State, it is critical that motorists know their rights and options when it comes to fighting these tickets and spaek to an experienced Traffic law attorney. If you have any questions, call me for a free consultation - 585.752.7523.
A bus driver in San Antonio is caught on camera while driving and texting. Crash ensues. Go figure.
Yesterday, in Arizona v. Gant, 07-542, the United States Supreme Court ruled that police need a warrant to search a vehicle of a person arrested once that person is secured in a police cruiser and poses no safety threat to officers.
The Court held, in a 5-4 decision:
Police may search the passenger compartment of a vehicle incident to a recent occupant’s arrest only if it is reasonable to believe that the arrestee might access the vehicle at the time of the search or that the vehicle contains evidence of the offense of arrest. Pp. 5–18. (a) Warrantless searches “are per se unreasonable,” “subject only to a few specifically established and well-delineated exceptions.” Katz v. United States, 389 U. S. 347, 357. The exception for a search incident to a lawful arrest applies only to “the area from within which [an arrestee] might gain possession of a weapon or destructible evidence.” Chimel, 395 U. S., at 763. This Court applied that exception to the automobile context in Belton, the holding of which rested inlarge part on the assumption that articles inside a vehicle’s passenger compartment are “generally . . . within ‘the area into which an arrestee might reach.’ ” 453 U. S., at 460.
Rodney Gant had been arrested in Tucson, AZ. for driving on a suspended license. He was handcuffed and placed in the back seat of a police cruiser. During a subsequent warrantless search of his car, officers found cocaine and drug paraphernalia in the vehicle. The Arizona trial court denied his Motion to Supress and he was convicted of drug offenses.
The majority opinion, written by Justice John Paul Stevens, noted warrantless searches are permitted by police only if the car’s passenger compartment is within reach of the suspect or there is probable cause to believe evidence will be found of the crime that led to the arrest.
In rejecting more expansive search powers Stevens rationalized:
“A rule that gives the police the power to conduct such a search whenever an individual is caught committing a traffic offense, when there is no basis for believing evidence of the offense might be found in the vehicle, creates a serious and recurring threat to the privacy of countless individuals. Indeed, the character of that threat implicates the central concern underlying the Fourth Amendment - the concern about giving police officers the unbridled discretion to rummage at will among a person’s private effects” Id. at 11-12.
So, what does this decision mean for the average New York driver? Clearly more protection from police searches. I have had countless cases where a driver was stopped by law enforcement for a simple traffic matter, such as speeding or another routine traffic violation, and it turns out they are driving on a suspended license and arrested. Subsequent vehicle search turns up contraband. Under Gant, the police now will need a warrant to search the vehicle, unless that search was for evidence of the crime that person was arrested for. The same rationale applies to DWI cases where the driver is arrested and placed in the police cruiser. Unless police have probable cause to believe the vehicle contains evidence of the crime of DWI, the police will need a warrant to search that vehicle.
It should be noted that Gant probably does not limit other Fourth Amendment warrant clause exceptions such as consent, inventory, parole/probation search, and weapons search upon reasonable suspicion.