Tags: attorney, california, californiabrshould, failing, failure, fight, finebrtoday, law, lawyer, legal, pay, pedestrian, received, state, ticket, traffic, yield

Failure to yield to pedestrian ticket - california

On Lawyer & Legal » Traffic Law

4,349 words with 4 Comments; publish: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 06:34:00 GMT; (80093.75, « »)

The state is: California

Should i fight this ticket or just pay the fine?

Today i received a ticket for failing to yield to a pedestrian. I was at a four way intersection and at the furthest left lane prepared to make a u-turn. The opposing traffic lights were green and the pedestrian began crossing the street (right in front of my car) but it took him the whole green light to make it to the middle of the intersection which was an island with grass. The pedestrian stood in the island for like 2-3 seconds and then my left turn light turned green so i paused for another 1-2 seconds to see if he was going to cross (i honestly thought he stopped there and would continue when the opposing lights turned green again) but he did not move so i proceeded with my u-turn. As i was making my u-turn the pedestrian all of a sudden began walking again and entered the crosswalk but was walking at a really slow pace so i finished my u-turn and when i got 5-10 yards away from the crosswalk a cop car flashed his lights and jumped over the island to pull me over and the car behind me who also made the u-turn. I was wondering if i have a good chance to fight this ticket or if my chances are slim and should just pay the ticket. Please let me know. Also what is the cost of this ticket? Thanks in advance and for any info.

P.S. On my ticket it reads the code 21950 and then either a 61 or a GI behind that and then the acronym cvc behind that. What does the 61 or GI stand for? Thanks again.

All Comments

Leave a comment...

    • Neither one of those subsections exists in the CA Vehicle Code, are you sure it isn't a d?

      Anyway, the ticket carries a $35 base fine, which totals (depending on the county you live in) somewhere between $155- 159. It would seem to me that it would be rather difficult for you to prove that the pedestrian in the crosswalk did all of this starting and stopping while he had the light, and in my courthouse in particular, if you chose to go through with a trial and lose, you lose the opportunity to go to traffic school. Not saying that it happens that way at all of the courthouses in the state, but at the 3 traffic court divisions that I've worked at, that's the way it's been (something to think about).

      #1; Wed, 04 Jul 2007 08:29:00 GMT
    • Thanks for the input and the responses. So is this a no win situation on my part? Should i even try to fight it or should i just pay the fine? Thanks
      #2; Thu, 05 Jul 2007 23:36:00 GMT
    • I'd say you have an argument, but then I wasn't there to see the whole situation. The officer may sway the court that you should have known the pedestrian was present and ignored him ... the court might decide that your conclusion about his staying put was reasonable. Like most court cases, it is entirely up to you whether you choose to fight it.

      What a number of people do is they plead not guilty at the arraignment and then they show up at court for their trial to see if the officer shows up. Many counties will make an announcement at the start of the trial allowing anyone who wishes to plead guilty to do so ... they will often also add that if they proceed to trial the option of traffic school MAY no be available to them if they are found guilty. If your officer shows, you can always plead guilty and opt for traffic school. Or, you can try the matter and hope the judge is at least sympathetic enough to still offer you T/S even if you lose.

      - Carl

      #3; Fri, 06 Jul 2007 00:14:00 GMT
    • I think it's probably "2195 (a) CVC" ...

      2195 . (a) The driver of a vehicle shall yield the right-of-way to

      a pedestrian crossing the roadway within any marked crosswalk or

      within any unmarked crosswalk at an intersection, except as otherwise

      provided in this chapter.

      If the pedestrian was continuing to cross against the pedestrian signal an argument can be made that he was not properly crossing ... but, subsection "a" does not place a caveat saying that the pedestrian must be crossing with a valid crossing signal - it says that you MUST YIELD to any pedestrian in a crosswalk.

      You might have a valid argument, but depending on the officer's observations, it might fail. It's a crap shoot.

      If you want to take traffic school, consider that option before taking the stand at trial. Once you take the stand on your own behalf, most CA courts will remove the traffic school option from the table.

      - Carl

      #4; Wed, 04 Jul 2007 13:39:00 GMT