Legal Question in Traffic Law in Washington

Re: Too many foglights

Mssrs. Lustick and Ferris are correct in both of their responses. If you ar eunsure of how to proceed, you should hire an attorney to defend your case if you really need to have a clear driving record for insurance purposes.

Re: Too many foglights

Since you are only 10 months or so into your 12-month deferral period, it�s possible that the court which issued your deferral could revoke it based on your new ticket. But I note that you deferral is on a speeding ticket, which is a moving violation and your new ticket is a non-moving violation.

Most people don�t realize it (and perhaps even some judges even don�t know this) but, you can actually have two separate deferred findings under state law. Under R.C.W. 46.61.070(5)(b), a Washington driver can have one traffic infraction deferral within a 7-year period for any moving violation committed and one deferral within a 7-year period for any nonmoving traffic infraction committed.

The ticket you just got is an equipment violation, and it is therefore classified as a non-moving violation. Your speeding ticket deferral may be revoked only if your equipment violation is �found committed.� But if the court will permit your new ticket to be deferred under RCW 46.61.070(5)(b), there will be no finding of committed made by the court and thus no revocation can occur. The hard part is going to be getting the court to grant you the second deferred. As I say, they may not be aware of this provision and most courts take a hard line on deferrals.

You need to ask about this before you begin the contested infraction hearing on your nonmoving equipment violation. The granting of deferred findings on traffic infractions is up the court�s discretion and there�s no absolute right to a deferred findings. Several courts won�t let you go deferred after you try to fight the ticket and do not prevail. So, go to court prepared to fight the ticket, but before starting, ask the judge whether you can get this nonmoving equipment violation deferred.

Re: Too many foglights

Review the applicable statute - RCW 46.37.180

Spot Lamps And Auxiliary Lamps - to determine whether you are in violation. Could two of your fog lamps be considered "spot lamps", or located such that they might be "auxiliary passing lamps" or "auxiliary driving lamps"? You are limited to two fog lamps, but you can also have two each of the above mentioned lamps.

With respect to your December 2002 deferral, you need to review the terms of the order. The judge likely conditioned a dismissal on either 1) no moving violations or 2) no violations at all. If the judge did not clearly set forth the conditions, you should be able to rely on the distinction in the statute as evidence that only moving violations would violate a deferral of findings on a prior moving violation.