BogusTicket
New Member
Hi there! I received a citation in the fine City of Plano, TX back in early July. I was the first car in line at the intersection and was in a lane that is marked left or straight (in four different places) and I chose to go straight. There was an officer directly behind me at the light who followed me through the intersection and then pulled me over. He said I went straight in a left turn only lane (and if I did, so did he). I objected and told him that it was marked left or straight. He took my license and insurance back to his vehicle and while in his patrol car, I saw him reaching up to his in-car video camera and turning it to where he could see it. Then when he came back to the car, he told me that he had reviewed the video and that the lane was marked left turn only. I took the ticket and we parted ways. I immediately looped back around and took video with my cell phone of the approach to the intersection, noting TWO freestanding signs on the left as well as TWO different painted arrows in the lane we were in that indicated that the second to the leftmost lane could go straight or turn left. The problem seems to be that the ONLY sign one can SEE from where we were sitting at the light indicates that the three lanes that flow straight from the entry to the exit of the intersection are LEFT ONLY, LEFT OR STRAIGHT (Middle lane), or STRAIGHT ONLY - and if one considers this sign as applying to the three lanes directly below it (it being mounted on the stoplight crossbar over the lanes) - it does make it look like the left of the three lanes that flow through the intersection is intended to be left only. However when I looked on Google Earth at the intersection (and printed TONS of pictures of all sorts of angles), and it is VERY clear that the 5 TOTAL lanes go as follows: LEFT ONLY, LEFT OR STRAIGHT, STRAIGHT ONLY, STRAIGHT OR RIGHT, RIGHT ONLY. I expect that the sign on the overhanging stoplight pole APPEARED to the officer to apply to the three MIDDLE lanes, when in reality, it was a poorly located sign indicating what the left three lanes must do. Here is where I need help. Last week, I filed a motion for discovery with the court, requesting, among other things, the in-car video. Today, I received the "answer" from the Assistant City Attorney, and while some production line items were granted, they said that the Defendant may schedule an appointment to view the tape in the Prosecutor's Office within 14 days prior to the trial date by calling and making an appointment to do so. They further stated that the State does not have the resources to make copies of tapes or audio recordings. (Are you kidding me??) My trial date WAS set for tomorrow, until I received a call last week telling me that the State had filed a motion for continuance until the first week in October (WHY?). They apparently made their motion for continuance rather close AFTER I filed my Motion for Discovery, but BEFORE or around the same time that they filed the answer. I called the Prosecutor's office today and was able to make an appointment for the 14th day prior to trial to review the video. I asked if I may videotape the playback of that video, and they said that I COULD do that. As background, I waived trial by jury to keep my time investment low, because, in my opinion, once the judge sees my documentation of the signage at that intersection AND sees what lane we were in when I was pulled over, the case WILL be dismissed. HOW CAN I INSURE THAT THE JUDGE SEES THAT VIDEO? Do I need to subpoena the video to trial - where it will either be available to me to show or must then be shown? , or can I have MY video camera "copy" admitted as evidence and shown? Is there a chance that when I review the video WITH / IN the Prosecutor's office that they can, AT THAT TIME, see how clearly the officer was mistaken and just dismiss the whole thing? Thanks for reading my saga - and any suggestions you have. PS - I tried the open records request avenue, but I was told by the records manager that any request for records surrounding an undecided / open case would be submitted to the attorney general for consideration, but most likely refused, declined, etc....
