I am going to post this here, It is worthy of everyones read. Always ask if an expert testified about the speed cameras precision.
I am also going to cut and paste the content. If this post needs to be elsewhere please move it where it need to be.
Posted by Karen Farkas April 28, 2008 17:59PM
9th Ohio District Court of Appeals ruling requires expert testimony to back laser speed gun's accuracy
Lead-foot drivers nabbed with laser speed guns could cruise around charges if courts cannot show an expert has testified to the accuracy of the devices.
On Monday, the 9th Ohio District Court of Appeals reversed a $100 ticket issued to a truck driver clocked at 67 mph in a 55-mph zone on Interstate 71 in Medina County.
The appeals court found no record that an expert had established the accuracy of the laser, the LTI-20-20, in Medina Municipal Court. Until an expert testifies about its precision, its results cannot be used in the court, said Medina Law Director Gregory Huber.
"We won't be able to rely on the LTI-20-20 laser until this is resolved," he said.
The court covers Medina, Brunswick, Chippewa Lake, Spencer and 11 townships. Anyone found guilty of speeding in the last 30 days in that court whose speed was measured by that laser can appeal, said Kenneth Turowski, who represented the truck driver, Donald Miko.
It was unclear Monday how many speeders clocked by the laser have been convicted in the court. Officials there do not keep a record of the number of speeding tickets issued each month, the clerk's office said.
Turowski said many municipal courts don't stay current with a required rule of evidence that an expert has to testify on the accuracy and scientific reliability of any speed measuring device before the results can be used against a defendant. The expert only has to testify once; then a judge can cite the finding in all future cases.
Medina Municipal Judge Dale Chase, who has been on the bench since 1987, is diligent about seeking expert testimony on lasers and likely did in the 1993 case he cited when affirming a magistrate ruling that Miko was guilty, Huber said. But the 1993 decision does not mention expert testimony.
Miko, 32, of Shirley, N.Y., was stopped by the State Highway Patrol on March 12, 2006, while driving north on the interstate in Brunswick Hills Township. Turowski said Miko fought the ticket because he did not think he was speeding.
Turowski realized the laser could be an issue when neither the magistrate nor the prosecutor in the case could cite any case involving the laser's reliability, he said. Chase cited the case when he overruled Turowski's objections and imposed the magistrate's ruling of a $100 fine, $162 in court costs and two points on Miko's license.
Most drivers simply pay their ticket, but Miko chose to fight, even though it cost him 50 times the cost of the fine, Turowski said.
terms | privacy | contactCopyright © 2006-2019