This worked for my lil bro when he was on his R1. Maybe use some of it as a template for yours?
STATEMENT OF FACTS
Defendant's Name:
I respectfully submit this written declaration to the Court pursuant to CVC40902. I plead Not Guilty to the charge of violating CVC 22350.The facts of my case are as follows: While riding on Bearvalley Road on mymotorcycle on 1-18-12, when i got boxed in by multiple vehicles. Having hadmy class M-1 license for 3 years, I know that being boxed in is not safe.Thankfully the vehicle in front of me changed lanes, so for my safety andthe saftey of my fellow motrists, I breifly sped up as instructed by theDMV Motorcylce Hand Book ("Vehicles Alongside: Do not ride next topassenger vehicles or trucks in other lanes if you don?t have to becauseyou might be in the driver?s blind spot. The driver could change laneswithout warning. Also, vehicles in the next lane can block your escape ifyou come upon danger in your own lane. Speed up or drop back to find aplace clear of traffic on both sides.") to get myself out of a dangeroussituation. I then was stopped by Officer D. Holland and was charged withviolating CVC 22350. The Officer has alleged that I was driving 64mph in a50mph zone based on Radar evidence. I believe that I was drivingapproximately 55mph at the time of my stop and that my speed was quite safefor a 6 lane highway with a center for the prevailing conditions.The Basic Speed Law, CVC 22350, states: "No person shall drive a vehicleupon a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable or prudent having dueregard for weather, visibility, the traffic on, and the surface and widthof the highway, and in no event at a speed which endangers the safety ofpersons or property."At the time of my stop, the road was dry and clear with light traffic. Onmy citation, the officer marks that the traffic was "medium," but stated hesaw no one around me. No persons or property were put at risk. As such, theOfficer does not make a credible case that I was in violation of the BasicSpeed Law.Further, I believe that the posted speed of 50mph on Bearvalley Road isartificially low, reflecting an out-of-date traffic and engineering surveyand, as such, may constitute an illegal Speed Trap pursuant to CVC40802(a)(2), which defines an illegal radar speed trap as "a particularsection of a highway with a...speed limit that is provided by thiscode...[which] limit is not justified by an engineering and traffic surveyconducted within five years prior to the date of the alleged violation, andenforcement of the speed limit involves the use of radar or any otherelectronic device that measures the speed of moving objects." If thetraffic survey on Bearvalley Road is more than five years old, theofficer's use of radar to determine my speed was illegal.When using radar evidence, the prosecution is required to prove that theuse of radar is not an illegal speed trap. Speed Trap Evidence 40803(b)states "In any prosecution under this code of a charge involving the speedof a vehicle, where enforcement involves the use of radar or otherelectronic devices which measure the speed of moving objects, theprosecution shall establish, as part of its prima facie case, that theevidence or testimony presented is not based upon a speed trap as definedin paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 40802."If the prosecution does not attach proof with its written declaration (acertified copy of the speed survey) to establish as part of its prima faciecase, that Sorrento Valley Road is not an illegal Speed Trap, as they arerequired to do pursuant to CVC 40803(b), I trust the Court will rule theradar evidence inadmissible and dismiss my case pursuant to CVC 40805.CVC 40805, Admission of Speed Trap Evidence, states:"Every court shall bewithout jurisdiction to render a judgment of conviction against any personfor violation of this code involving the speed of a vehicle if the courtadmits any evidence or testimony secured in violation of, or which isinadmissible under this article."I trust in the Court's fairness and ask that my citation be dismissed inthe interest of justice.If the court does not find in my favor in this case, I would like torequest traffic school.I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State ofCalifornia that the foregoing is true and correct.Date: April 23, 2012
