Citation issued for "flashing" lights to warn of speed trap

Status
Not open for further replies.
I also received a citation from FHP recently here in Central Fl, for Improper Flashing of Headlights. I e-mailed the DC attorney (Mark Zaid) who fought the same charge and won. He thinks I should fight the ticket and the ACLU might help with the situation.
 
Popeye Doyle said:
I also received a citation from FHP recently here in Central Fl, for Improper Flashing of Headlights. I e-mailed the DC attorney (Mark Zaid) who fought the same charge and won. He thinks I should fight the ticket and the ACLU might help with the situation.
Click to expand...

I've read, and re-read Zaid's position, and his correspondence with police. I think with his history and education, he carries a much bigger stick than we do. I have not tried to contact him - though I may after reading your post.

Your post only confirms my suspicion that FHP is actively pushing this issue. I just exchanged emails with Brett Darrow (look up his story on Google) who also suggested the ACLU get involved - especially since it's 'caught on tape'. I submitted an email to them just before posting this.

Make sure you subscribe to this thread (or check it frequently). It's the only civil place I've found to discuss strategy without cops immediately going on the offense and trashing the thread.
 
erkme73 said:
Please... let's not let this one spiral downward too!
Click to expand...
It won't ... I was funnin' with Moose ... we're the po-po, and I think we generally agree that the code section that you were cited for is the wrong one. I DO think that unless you can show a system wide conspiracy to use this as a means of punishing drivers, that the ACLU is not going to be concerned with your traffic citation for flashing your lights to warn people of a police presence. The ACLU takes on cases of particular legal interest and public notoriety, and they are largely funded by the awards they might receive negotiating settlements. This is not likely to be enough to attract their attention.

You have been provided with good advice on how to win your case, and that is likely all you can expect. If you wish to bring your citation up to the local media, go right ahead. if you live in a very slow news area and have a crusading media personality, you might get a little play. If not, then you really haven't wasted a lot of time and effort anyway.
 
Thx for clearing that up...

What I'd love to see is the State issue a statement that this particular statute simply doesn't apply to motorist communications. I just don't think I, as a lowly civy, would ever get that kind of reaction. ACLU or media may. It'd just be nice to have something on record saying, "oops, our bad." Kinda like Zaid got from the Montgomery County Sheriff in MD. Wishful thinking probably.
 
erkme73 said:
Thx for clearing that up...

What I'd love to see is the State issue a statement that this particular statute simply doesn't apply to motorist communications. I just don't think I, as a lowly civy, would ever get that kind of reaction. ACLU or media may. It'd just be nice to have something on record saying, "oops, our bad." Kinda like Zaid got from the Montgomery County Sheriff in MD. Wishful thinking probably.
Click to expand...
The state is not likely to issue such a statement simply because they are not in the habit of clarifying what statutes apply under what situations. If it became a big enough issue, they would likely send out a memorandum to law enforcement agencies advising them to train their officers on what is and is not acceptable, but they are not likely to issue a public memo saying that this code does not apply in this situation as that opens the door to hordes of similar situations.

When/if the court sides with you, that will be the state's way of saying the officer fouled up. You can always bring that up to the agency or office and suggest that they provide training on that particular law. It is also possible that the agency office where the officer works might send a note of apology to YOU, but not likely to send it off to the world.

And I do not know who Zaid is.
 
The ACLU was ready to assist Mr. Zaid if he had not won his case. Supposedly the ACLU likes to tackle cases like this, and since they were ready in Maryland, maybe they will pick it up here in Florida.

My initial belief was that a county traffic court judge would tend to side with the trooper and you would have to bring in some mighty strong evidence, to sway him or her to your side, especially since this is a revenue generator for the state and the county, so the deck might be stacked against us.

There is no doubt we didn't violate that particular statute, hopefully the court will see it the same way.
 
erkme73 said:
Thx for clearing that up...

What I'd love to see is the State issue a statement that this particular statute simply doesn't apply to motorist communications. I just don't think I, as a lowly civy, would ever get that kind of reaction. ACLU or media may. It'd just be nice to have something on record saying, "oops, our bad." Kinda like Zaid got from the Montgomery County Sheriff in MD. Wishful thinking probably.
Click to expand...

Write a complaint to your representative in your state legislature.
 
erkme73

Have you found any Florida case law or court decisions pertaining to this statute? I've searched the internet and have found Maryland and Tenn but nothing in Florida.

Thanks for any info.
 
Popeye Doyle said:
erkme73

Have you found any Florida case law or court decisions pertaining to this statute? I've searched the internet and have found Maryland and Tenn but nothing in Florida.

Thanks for any info.
Click to expand...

No, the best I could find was an an appellate decision on the exact same verbiage of our statute that was overturned because of grammatical intent. It's a very good read: http://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...77651&q="96+Ohio+App.3d+99"&hl=en&as_sdt=2002

If the hearing officer let's me get to the point where I cite these other legal precedents, and he objects based on variation of state law, I will default to my remaining argument (blinking of headlamps is permitted under (316.0832).

If he finds me guilty, I will appeal and create the FL case law.
 
Last edited:
erkme73

Why are you choosing a hearing officer over a traffic court judge? Just curious. Are you using an attorney or representing yourself?

Thanks, Popeye
 
I don't know how it is in Hillsborough, but in Pasco your traffic court case is seen by a 'hearing officer' aka. magistrate. They're not true judges. Usually defense attorneys that have to pay their penance for working in the court system...

I marked the outside of the envelope with "I request a court date" and mailed it back to them.

Oh - and I'm representing myself, not an atty.
 
I received mine in Osceola Co. I called and they stated you can have a hearing officer or a judge. I don't know if one would be better over the other, for our type of case.

I contacted the ACLU and I'm waiting for a response. I'll let you know if they respond to me. I also e-mailed FHP to get their "official" opinion on this statute, to see if the trooper and FHP are on the same sheet of music.:D
 
Good thinking. Let me know if/what you hear. I will do the same.

BTW, my email addy is eric.junk (at) tab-md (dot) com
 
Just an update to those following the story. According to the FOI request results, FHP has issued the following number of citations for "flashing light" violations per year:
2005.....326
2006.....451
2007.....368
2008.....734
2009.....531
Click to expand...

Quite interesting that 500+ people were cited this year for having 'flashing lights' on their vehicles.
 
Last edited:
So back to the audio recording... given the labels on all four windows that read "Notice: conversations inside and within 6' of this vehicle may be recorded" and the public nature of the stop, is it safe to assume the recording was properly noticed, and/or there was no reasonable expectation to privacy?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

Get a free case review from a lawyer
Back
Top