Legal Question in Traffic Law in California

Appeal Traffic Infraction and am seeking a resource to discover case law to bolster my position that judicial bias hampered my ability to get a fair trial.

Officer suggested during his direct testimony that he was parked under an overpass, visualized my vehicle traveling at high rate of speed. That he entered the roadway, chased, caught up to and paced my vehicle to very the high rate of speed and subsequently pulled me over.

Following my truthful and fact based testimony; which was that the Officer was actually parked and stationary 3/4 of a mile further up the highway and positioned less than twenty (20) feet in front of the exit I had to take to get to my destination. And that in fact, after I passed the Officers position, he simply pulled in to the exit behind my vehicle when I left the highway.

On redirect, the Officer changed his testimony to line up with my fact based testimony. However, he then asserted radar as a basis for the stop, described that he visualized my vehicle approaching from behind him at a high rate of speed, at which time he set his front and rear radar.

Ultimately, the Court convicted me on flawed, erroneous and exaggerated testimony. I have Appealed the conviction and am asserting that judicial bias; due to the fact that the judge allowed the Officer to change his testimony in open court during trial and did not challenge the Officer about the conflicting testimony.


Asked on 7/20/13, 7:42 am

1 Answer from Attorneys
Zadik Shapiro Law Offices of C. Zadik Shapiro

This isn't what you want to hear but in a traffic trial the judge is the trier of fact, As such she/he can choose what evidence to believe and what evidence to disbelieve. As long as there is some evidence which supports the judge's decision, even if there is evidence to the contrary, the decision is upheld on appeal.

Read more
Answered on 7/20/13, 7:48 pm


Related Questions & Answers

More Traffic Law questions and answers in California