Last year, NY introduced it’s “move over” law to protect police officers and other emergency workers from the dangers of passing vehicles while working roadside (move over law NY).  Now New York’s “move over law” is being expanded as of New Year’s Day to include tow trucks, other emergency vehicles and highway crews.

The law requiring drivers to shift lanes when approaching flashing police lights will now include flashing amber lights as well.

Drivers must slow down when and where it isn’t safe for them to actually change lanes and move over.

Just last month, Kevin Woloszyn was driving in Cattaraugus County on Interstate 90 when his truck broke down. The tow truck driver who responded was killed when a tractor trailer hit him.  It’s a said reminder of the dangers of working roadside and stories like these are the inspiration for the original (and now the expanded) version of the law.

It’s pretty simple from a driver’s perspective.  If you see activity on the side of the road, proceed with caution.  Move over and out of the way if you can, slow down if you cannot.

Scott Feifer

A New York lawyer will face six months of suspension for lying to get out of a speeding ticket and falsely claiming that the state trooper made anti-Semitic comments.

NY attorney Eliott Dear was pulled over in July 2007 by a New Jersey state trooper.  He was issued a speeding ticket for driving 84 mph in a 55 mph zone.

A few days after the issuance of the summons, Dear wrote a letter to the traffic court on his law firm’s letterhead.  He accused the officer of calling him a “Jew Kike.”

When an Internal Affairs officer interviewed Dear by telephone he repeated his claims of anti-Semitic behavior.  Dear also cited the officer’s failure to acknowledge his explanation for speeding: that his pregnant wife needed a bathroom.

Fortunately for the officer, his car and uniform were rigged to video and audio recording devices throughout the car stop.  Neither recording supported Dear’s version of the incident.

Internal Affairs cleared the trooper of wrongdoing and the state police subsequently lodged a complaint against Dear using the recording and the Internal Affairs interview as their primary evidence.

After it was all said and done, Dear paid the $265 ticket.  He admitted that the trooper never used an ethnic slur against him. A disciplinary committee for the New York appellate court’s Manhattan-based first department made five charges against Dear, and the lawyer admitted to them.   Despite Dear’s plea for a censure or reprimand, the hearing panel recommended a six-month suspension, which the appellate division granted on Dec. 8.

This could have caused irreparable damage to this officer’s career, reputation and family.  This could have caused tremendous tension in the community.   Makes you wonder sometimes what people are thinking.

In November 2006, MADD launched their Campaign to Eliminate Drunk Driving.  For the fifth anniversary of the Campaign, they have released a national report which rates each state on its progress toward eliminating drunk driving.

On average, the nation received three stars (out of 5).  New York is a four star state.

Stars are awarded as follows:

1. Requiring ignition interlocks for all convicted drunk drivers
2. Conducting sobriety checkpoints
3. Creating enhanced penalties for those who drive drunk with children in the vehicle
4. Participating in “no-refusal” activities for those suspected of drunk driving
5. Utilizing Administrative License Revocation for drunk driving offenders

New York did not receive a fifth star in relation to the “no-refusal” point.  I imagine just about every state has some law or method to address those who refuse to immediately submit to a BAC test because it’s necessary to prevent people from getting away with DWI just by saying no to a field test.  In New York Section 1194 of the Vehicle and Traffic Law provides for the temporary suspension (pending a hearing on the matter) and subsequent revocation (if the hearing shows you did indeed refuse) of a license or operating privilege when a person refuses to submit to a chemical test.  MADD is actually talking about “no refusal activities” like the no refusal weekends some states have set up.  These are enforcement periods where checkpoints are set up and people are asked to submit to a test and if they refuse judges are on call all weekent to issue warrants authorizing the police to draw blood on the spot.  The intent here is to publicize the fact that refusal will not be an option.

Overall, NY did well with it’s four stars according to this report and is “working diligently to stop drunk driving.”

Scott Feifer

MADD rates each state

A texting-while-driving simulator similar to an old-fashioned video game is being demonstrated at nine Westchester County high schools this week.

The simulator aims to replicate some real world distractions.  These distractions come via the voice of an annoying passenger who fails to wear her own seat belt, asks the driver to drive faster and then requests that the driver calls and texts her brother.

Through the distractions the driver must maneuver local streets and then highways while using either a real cellphone or the one integrated with the video simulation.

During a demonstration yesterday, test subjects routinely got into fake accidents while trying to multitask.  Scarsdale police Chief John Brogan quickly got into an “accident” while trying the simulator himself.

Westchester County District Attorney Janet DiFiore said the demonstration should make it very clear that “even one second of distraction can lead to a lifetime of regret” and that distracted driving poses dangers “not only to the driver and the passenger but to everyone who uses the roads.”

The simulator is part of a plan to teach and enforce state laws related to distracted driving that governor Cuomo has shown are clearly a priority in New York.  These laws have gone secondary violations (could only be issued if the car stop was primarily for another violation) which cary no points to secondary violations that carry two points (February) and then to primary violations which carry three points (July) all this year.

While distracted driving is something every single driver needs to avoid, it is particularly prevalent with younger (and thus the least experienced) drivers.   In March, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood released a poll that said 30 percent of people under 30 acknowledged sending text messages while driving.

Scott Feifer

The NYPD traffic ticket fixing scandal continues as 16 officers were arraigned on criminal charges last month in the Bronx. An officer convicted just a few days ago of planting crack on innocent people in Brooklyn. Five Staten Island officers were arrested last month in a federal gun-running sting.

There’s a lot of bad news recently surrounding the NYPD and I’ve had a few clients ask me about it.  I get mostly either a question about specific Bronx traffic tickets or just general commentary and grumbling about bad officers issuing bad tickets that may or may not have been justified.

1.  Will the Bronx TVB ticket fixing scandal affect my already closed or still open traffic violation matter in the Bronx?  Start with the premise that only tickets issued by the officers who have been either criminally or administratively involved in the scandal are in play.  Just because your ticket was issued in the same borough does not automatically raise questions about it.  From there, realize that it’s incredibly unlikely for any action to be taken on closed cases.  There are a number of legal and administrative reasons why that’s highly unlikely.  So we’re only talking about active/open TVB traffic tickets issued by officers involved in the scandal and with respect to those the answer is yes–your case may very well be affected.  If the officers are temporarily or permanently banned from testifying in traffic court, you may get lucky and an officer won’t appear in court on your hearing date.  If you have reason to believe a ticket you are currently fighting was issued by an officer named in the ticket fixing scandal, set a hearing date and go to court.  Don’t delay.

2.  Other clients while discussing their traffic tickets with me have either said it outright or insinuated that these multiple scandals are “proof” that that cops lie and do bad things and a judge should and will dismiss their ticket.  It’s here where we need a little perspective.  First, many just express their displeasure with their issuing officer to me but never really bother to tell me they didn’t do what they were accused of doing.   It’s unfair just because you are annoyed you got busted to make the jump and connect officers simply doing their jobs and issuing traffic tickets with an officer planting crack on an innocent person.   Second, even if you really didn’t go through that red light or speed as fast as an officer charged you, it doesn’t mean the officer intentionally or negligently wrote a bad summons.  The officer may have made an honest mistake and again, this is very very far from corrupt behavior.  Finally, you shouldn’t assume the officer you encountered in a traffic stop has any inclination towards corruption just because he’s a police officer.  There are scandals in every profession and clearly that does not make everyone in that profession corrupt.

On that last note, a recent quote from Justice Milton Mollen, a former deputy mayor and longtime judge who explored police corruption two decades ago.  “These are isolated individuals. The vast majority of police are not corrupt,” he said. “If you have 35,000 police officers … think 35,000 clergymen, 35,000 lawyers, 35,000 ditch-diggers, you’re going to find X percent are going to be corrupt.”

Scott Feifer

The NYPD traffic ticket fixing scandal that’s been in the news most of this year took another step forward Friday as 16 officers were arraigned on criminal charges in the Bronx in conjunction with the scandal.   Hundreds of officers have found themselves involved in the scandal to some extent.  While the vast majority of officers will be dealt with administratively by the NYPD, the 16 arraigned Friday are charged with activity that rose to the criminal level.

Eleven of the 16 were charged with fixing tickets.  All 16 were charged with a official misconduct charges ranging from destroying summonses to accepting gifts or forcing other officers to perjure themselves in court.

Many officers not directly involved with the scandal were at the scene to protest the entire investigation.  The crowd of officers backed their colleagues while voicing their displeasure with NYPD officials who pushed ahead with this investigation in the first place.   Officers referred to the investigation as a “persecution”, not a prosecution.  Chants of “Ray Kelly, hypocrite” and “innocent, innocent” were heard from the crowd.

Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association head Pat Lynch said the investigation focused on rank-and-file cops and spared higher ranking officers.  One sign at the scene read “just following orders”, a reference to the fact that many of the subjects of the investigation claim they were simply acting on a request of a superior within the department to help make a ticket go away.

In general, officers feel it is quite unfair to suddenly unleash an investigation of this scope and levy criminal charges for fixing tickets which was as much a part of regular police work as issuing a ticket itself.  Ticket fixing was traditionally seen as a courtesy, not a crime.

According to Commissioner Kelly, ticket fixing activities  “are crimes under the law and can’t be glossed over as ‘courtesies’ or as part of an acceptable culture.”  He added that “those who try to rationalize them as such are kidding themselves.”

The accused accused officers were shown some courtesy and given the opportunity to turn themselves in overnight as a way of dodging the media and delays in fingerprint processing.  This didn’t seem to mean much to the officers who feel, as one put it, that “this whole thing is a bunch of bullshit”.

Scott Feifer, Esq.

Here are some stories of interest pertaining to traffic tickets and driving related issues outside of NY.

October 15, 2011
In 2003, 3,815 aggressive driving violations. In 2010, 23,180. Aggressive Driving On the Rise In Florida

September 18, 2011:
Missouri Child Passenger Safety Week. Aggressive Enforcement Of Child Safety Restraint Violations

August 25, 2011:
Houston follows Los Angeles and ends red light camera program.  Putting An End To Red Light Camera Enforcement

July 19,2011:
Carmageddon in California wasn’t as bad as expected. Nicely Done, California Drivers

July 15, 2011:
New Illinois law makes it the 15th State to require every person in car to wear a seatbelt.  Illinois Seat Belt Law

July 5, 2011:
South Carolina forms Commission to examine automated camera traffic tickets. South Carolina Camera Tickets

July 1, 2011:
California changes law with respect to driving school and ticket dismissal. New California Driving School Law Closes Loopholes.

June 28, 2011:
Nevada ahead of the game in preparing for self driving cars. Nevada Thinking About A World With Self Driving Cars.

June 23, 2011:
Possible national bill to ban driving while using a cell phone. National Cell Phone Bill Proposed

June 17, 2011:
Examples from a few states of some of the issues surrounding camera tickets. Camera Ticket News From Around The Country.

June 15, 2011 Traffic Ticket helps police catch carjacker. Traffic Ticket In Getaway Car Is The Clue.

June 9, 2011
Mahwah, NJ Traffic Tickets Issued Electronically With New System.  Mahwah, NJ Traffic Tickets

June 8, 2011:
Texas Traffic Ticket Information Now Available Online.  Texas Traffic Tickets

Governor Cuomo signed a new law over the summer to crack down on texting while driving.

In August, the first full month after the new law took effect, Police issued 1,082 tickets.  According to NY State records, this is up from an average of 427 per month from January through June.

Cuomo commented that “We were serious when this law passed. Texting while driving is illegal and the law is being enforced, so don’t do it,”

Whether it was a coincidence or he knew it was a Doors (Roadhouse Blues) song lyric, he added “Keep your eyes on the road and your hands (up)on the wheel.”

This summer’s new law changed what was a “secondary” offense  (could only be issued after observing another traffic violation) to a “primary” offense .  Now, officers could stop motorists and issue a summons if texting was the only violation observed.

In NYC, records show 438 tickets issued in August, up from an average of 189 per month from January through June and up from 109 in August 2010.

According to the NY Post, an analysis of traffic tickets issued in 2011 by the NYPD has revealed the following:

• Elmhurst has the highest number of speeding tickets issued (2,094)
• Flushing has the highest number of cellphone charges (2,589)
• The East 60s in Manhattan see the largest number of red light tickets (1,480) and driving the wrong way down a one way street violations (359).
• The West 30s in Manhattan are home to the most failure to yield to a pedestrian tickets in NYC (no specific number cited).
• Cellphone violations are the most commonly cited in NYC (95,426). This is especially noteworthy considering these violations have gone from 0 to 2 to 3 points this year alone.  NY Cell Phone Violations Now Three Points
• Seatbelt violations were the second most commonly cited in NYC (90,062)
• As for individual Boroughs, Brooklyn saw the most traffic tickets issued (141,971), followed by Queens (128,098), Manhattan (115,428), Bronx (71,786), and Staten Island (27,388).

Overall, moving violations are down 6.4 percent from 2010. It may just be a natural dip in numbers that traditionally go up and down. Some suggest it may be directly related to the increased scrutiny on officers who issue traffic tickets in the wake of the NYPD ticket fixing scandal. I wrote a little about this increased scrutiny at the TVB and how it is potentially changing the behavior of officers and judges in court and the New York Times recently took a look at this as well. Perhaps officers feel their best chance to avoid trouble or poor reviews or lost vacation time is to simply avoid issuing any significant volume of traffic tickets.

Scott Feifer

As many know, there is an ongoing “ticket fixing” scandal within the NYPD (NYC Ticket Fixing Scandal).  Unfortunately, a number of motorists and officers who had nothing to do with it are getting caught up in the aftermath of the scandal.

Officers at the Traffic Violations Bureau are now routinely watched by superiors and the Internal Affairs Bureau as they testify.  They are there to make sure that each and every officer follows through on the tickets they’ve written and doesn’t try to “fix” anything in any blatant or even subtle manner.

We don’t have a problem with an anti-fixing policy.   No one can complain about a system which is merely trying to elicit full and complete and honest and fair and true testimony offered by an officer who issued a summons.

But what happens when that honest and true testimony leads to a finding of not guilty?  Take for example an officer who issued a ticket to a motorist for making a turn from the improper lane and is asked in court by the motorist whether he observed a car blocking the proper lane.  The officer may candidly respond that he really couldn’t see from where he was and it’s possible there was a vehicle blocking the proper lane.  The judge may then make the right decision and dismiss the case.   It’s now possible that this officer, if it’s a courtroom under observation, may potentially have to answer questions about the dismissal.  Why didn’t you say this?  Why did you say you didn’t remember that, or weren’t sure about the car?  Do you know this motorist?  His uncle?  What’s going on here…

Now we do have a problem.  Honesty can potentially be considered suspicious.  How will the officer answer the next time he’s in the same position?

The effect of this monitoring potentially extends to the judge as well.  These judges preside over cases with the same officers week after week, year after year and they get to know the different officers well.  They are understandably sympathetic about the extra scrutiny these officers, most of whom have done nothing wrong, are under.  Will this affect how they rule on a questionable case in a courtroom under observation?

Three times recently, we completed cases for clients where we were certain the charges should and would be dismissed outright.  Instead, clients were offered either a lower fine or a split decision (where the judge will find a ticket guilty while dismissing companion tickets issued together), essentially “consolation prizes” in lieu of complete dismissal.  We’ve also tried cases recently where the judge denied motions or otherwise assisted the motorist in ways not previously expected. No one can say for sure if the fact that the courtroom was under observation was the reason for the questionable decisions, but it’s certainly fair to question whether this is all having some kind of unanticipated affect on the judges.

All this said, procedure and the atmosphere in general at the TVB changes constantly.  Our job is always to keep on top of what is happening at any given time and take the actions and decisions necessary to maximize our client’s chances of success.

Scott Feifer, Esq.