YSK that in Missouri, a police officer’s trained visual…
0 reactions
YSK that in Missouri, a police officer’s trained visual estimate alone can be enough to convict a driver of speeding
**Why YSK:** In Missouri, officers can rely on training and visual estimation to convict drivers if they are substantially over the speed limit. They can round speeds, and courts usually accept it. Small differences may not matter, so knowing this can help you understand how to stay under thresholds that could turn a minor ticket into a misdemeanor.
**Note:** Below is how I came to find this out. To be clear, I deserved a ticket. You will not get me arguing that I did not, and that is not the point of this post.
I was cited for “exceeding the posted speed limit by 20–25 mph,” but I am certain I was not going that fast. It matters because the difference can change the charge from a minor moving violation to a misdemeanor offense comparable to a DWI, which carries significantly higher penalties. Such as thousand(s) in fines and potential jail time.
I wanted my lawyer to do discovery to challenge how the speed was determined, but I learned that can actually make things worse. Missouri appellate courts allow officers to testify to speed based on training and visual estimation when the speed is substantially over the limit, even without relying on radar. Once you push discovery, the state does not necessarily need device evidence anymore.
I was surprised that this legal fallback exists, and it kind of sucks that it is possible. Wonder if other states have something similar.
Full case link: Missouri Court of Appeals, 2007 https://law.justia.com/cases/missouri/court-of-appeals/2007/28138-2.html
#education
source
**Why YSK:** In Missouri, officers can rely on training and visual estimation to convict drivers if they are substantially over the speed limit. They can round speeds, and courts usually accept it. Small differences may not matter, so knowing this can help you understand how to stay under thresholds that could turn a minor ticket into a misdemeanor.
**Note:** Below is how I came to find this out. To be clear, I deserved a ticket. You will not get me arguing that I did not, and that is not the point of this post.
I was cited for “exceeding the posted speed limit by 20–25 mph,” but I am certain I was not going that fast. It matters because the difference can change the charge from a minor moving violation to a misdemeanor offense comparable to a DWI, which carries significantly higher penalties. Such as thousand(s) in fines and potential jail time.
I wanted my lawyer to do discovery to challenge how the speed was determined, but I learned that can actually make things worse. Missouri appellate courts allow officers to testify to speed based on training and visual estimation when the speed is substantially over the limit, even without relying on radar. Once you push discovery, the state does not necessarily need device evidence anymore.
I was surprised that this legal fallback exists, and it kind of sucks that it is possible. Wonder if other states have something similar.
Full case link: Missouri Court of Appeals, 2007 https://law.justia.com/cases/missouri/court-of-appeals/2007/28138-2.html
#education
source
| 4,000 mlx | |
| 5 | |
| 0 |