Failed To Signal Turn?

[tristan]

So recently I was given a citation for Failed to Signal Turn in a suburb of Houston, Texas. I was coming out of a very popular “Town Center Complex”. Lots of bars, restaurants, shopping, etc..I pulled out into a main highway turning right. Leaving the complex you go into a one lane, right turn only exit. No cross over option. No left turn option. You can only go right. Not even a stop sign if I recall correctly. Officer says I “failed to signal”. Do I have a case? Basically I was correctly turning with traffic into a one way street. Was there a need to signal when there is only one option to turn?

Incidentally the officer was an asshole. I know many of the LE I my area. He wanted to write me my ticket as fast as her could and move on. Before I could get turned around he already had another car pulled over for the same thing that was turning right in a right turn only lane. I even pulled over and videoed him and got the plate number of the other car. He pulled 4 cars for same turn signal violation in 15 minutes. All in turn only lanes.

If I have a case I want to front him out. Posting here now. But am going to call legal counsel tomorrow. I have respect for our officers, but not for those that want to make a name for themselves stacking up petty shit like this. What an asshole.

Thanks for the advise for those that offer.

[scioneyed]

you never have a case against a cop, it's always gonna be their word against yours. you would have to get a lawyer at a chance to win this it would end up costing more than the ticket. I went out one weekend with my cousin and I wasn't drinking but he got pretty loaded, as we left the bar I noticed a cop in the parking lot as we pulled out he followed and pulled me over he said I didn't make a complete stop as I exited the parking lot which was BS. He asked me if I had been drinking as I handed him my license and my CHL (conceled handgun license) he quickly asked where my gun was and said if I reached for it that, that would be the last thing I ever did, literally threatened my life. He told me to grab the steering wheel then grabbed my wrists with both his hands and bent them back he pulled me out of the car thru the window and asked me where my gun and I told him it was under the seat. He then said he was protecting me because he wasn't sure if I had been drinking. My cousin never moved from his seat, he cuffed me and gave me a breathalyzer test which I passed, he uncuffed me and told me to get back in the car then he asked my cousin if he had been drinking and my cousin made the mistake of getting out of the car with the anticipation of taking a breathalyzer test, the cop runs around and hits my cousin in the leg with his baton. My cousin hits the ground and the cop yells at me to get the fuck outta there. I left but I felt like shit leaving my cousin there but what could I do. I called non emergency to report the incident but they wouldn't believe me. When I got home I saw 2 cops going down my street really slow. In the end my cousin got charged for disorderly conduct and resisting arrest, the police officers report never mentioned that he was in a car, it stated that he was walking down the middle of the street trying to get a ride and there was no video evidence entered due to faulty equipment. So the police are gonna do whatever they want and there's not much we can do about it

[Capt. Lincoln F. Stern]

The only way you beat the ticket is if the cop does not show up.

you take your chances on that.

[txpussyboy]

While you are using good logic, it is not the law. What you might try is the deferred disposition option. You still have to pay the fines, but if you do not have any repeat offenses in 6 months, the ticket is removed from your record.

[Stud Daddy]

1st off the cop was hunting for DWIs or DUIs in all likelihood and the turn signal BS was his excuse to pull you over & check you out.

There are lots of shytbag cops that do this. They also use this if they think your cruising for a date in a pick-up area for SWs.

I had a similar event happen & it took me asking the cop 5 times before he answered me on why he pulled me over. I was PO'd but kept my cool. He wrote the ticket while lying his ass of to me about how I hadn't signaled my turn etc.

Knowing the area I immediately went to his Duty station & tried to catch his watch commander. I ended up leaving the WC a message about the officer's questionable conduct. Thye next morning I was down there again early & I was personally able to speak with the WC & in a nice way let him know what I thought of his officer & the entire event. I also let him know I was fighting the ticket & I would drag it out over a 2 or 3 months/visits to traffic court ( basically to tie up this officer on his day(s) off & inconvenience his ass as much as possible. (since a worked nights it was no problem to do this). Long story short the bum never showed at the 1st traffic court date & the ticket was dismissed.

[S O B]

Not WKing the cop but, you have to signal intent. It's a flick of your limp wrist to flick the turn signal. Use it.

[ShysterJon]

I'm with txpussyboy. We're talking about a traffic ticket, for goshsakes! Don't expect the hideous injustice you've suffered to be the subject of a TV mini-series starring Harrison Ford. Go to court and apply for deferred adjudication community supervision so the offense doesn't show up on your permanent driving record. Then move on in life. And learn to pick your battles a little better.

[sky_wire]

Originally Posted by tristan

..... Basically I was correctly turning with traffic into a one way street. Was there a need to signal when there is only one option to turn? ......

No, there was no need to signal. Yes, there is a Texas appellate decision directly on point. Alas, I don't remember the citation, and I'm too lazy at the moment. Try google. You might get lucky.

[Selena Romano]

i hate houston cops i had the same problem there too.

[Sarcastro]

Mahaffey v. State, 316 S.W.3d 633 (Tex. Crim.App. 2010)

[ShysterJon]

I don't think the Mahaffey case is on point. In that case, the defendant was traveling in the far-right lane of a highway, his lane ended, he merged left, and he didn't signal when he merged. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals held it's not a violation of the law to fail to signal when one lane merges into another because merging is not a "turn." (The court remanded the case to the court of appeals for it to determine whether merging is a "lane change.") However, the court noted: "Under the plain language of the Transportation Code, all movements right or left on the roadway must be made safely, but only some—turns, lane changes, or starts from a parked position—require a signal."

By contrast, tristan didn't merge - he MADE A TURN when he "pulled out into a main highway turning right." (Emphasis added.) He TURNED right from a street in a shopping center onto a highway. tristan's argument is different from the defendant in Mahaffey. tristan argues he didn't have to signal because the lane he was in was a right-turn only lane. In other words, tristan argues he didn't need to signal his right turn because turning right was all he could legally do. But that doesn't deny that he TURNED.

In my view, under Mahaffey, tristan broke the law. He needed to signal his turn.

Now, your turn. Or you can fail to turn.

[latinbreeze]

I applaud you for wanting to fight the charge and getting video of this cop pulling people over left and right. I don't know which turn this cop says you didn't signal. But, we have had success arguing that the Traffic code applies to persons driving on public roadways. Someone in a private drive or private parking lot is not on the public roadway. If you failed to signal coming out of a private parking lot, I think you have an argument that the stop was bad. I am pretty sure there is a case on this point. Further, I believe there is a case out of the Texarkana courts that essentially says failure to signal when you are in a designated turning lane is not a traffic code violation. That is a Texarkana appeals court and probably no other court in Texas would adopt the same ruling, but it's worth a try.

The sad thing about police work is that it was once a job to protect and serve the people. Now, the various governments use them as income generators. It is also sad that some of these cops have this "us" against "them" attitude where the general public is the "them". Not all cops are bad. Most are good guys, especially the older more tenured guys. But, it gets me riled up when they keep their code of silence and allow bad cops to get away with Shit. If you remind them that you have constitutional civil rights, they call you a god damned Constitutionalist, as if that's a bad word. Since when can they arrest someone for the charge of resisting arrest and no other charge? I see these cases in court and always encourage the defendants to fight them. There has to have been a valid violation of the criminal code to justify an arrest in the first place. An arrest for resisting arrest? Bull shit. Only one way to stop them from continuing this B.S. is to challenge them in court. Set the thing for jury trial where your peers can see what really happened to you. You could go with a bench trial to the judge as the fact finder, but who do we mostly elect to the bench in Texas? Prosecutors who see everyone as guilty first who must prove innocence. Again, not all judges are this way, but check their background first to see if they have a tendency to lean State side. File a motion to quash the complaint as it doesn't allege a crime to justify the stop. If you lose, appeal to county court and do it again. The cop probably won't show up in a big city to a trial. If he shows up the first time, he may not show up to the county court.

Let's not be sheople. Unless you can't spare the time, there's no reason not to force them to prove up their case when they fucked up.

[ShysterJon]

latinbreeze: I'm a big enough man to admit when I'm wrong, and you've convinced me. I think tristan should contest his traffic ticket all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. To me, it's the principle of the thing. No man should have to pay a few hundred dollars for a fine when he's innocent. I'll even take the case on and discount my fee. I figure with all the levels of appeal, research, briefing, and appearances-- let's see -- please remit $25,000, tristan ole buddy.

[Sarcastro]

Originally Posted by ShysterJon

I don't think the Mahaffey case is on point. In that case, the defendant was traveling in the far-right lane of a highway, his lane ended, he merged left, and he didn't signal when he merged. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals held it's not a violation of the law to fail to signal when one lane merges into another because merging is not a "turn." (The court remanded the case to the court of appeals for it to determine whether merging is a "lane change.") However, the court noted: "Under the plain language of the Transportation Code, all movements right or left on the roadway must be made safely, but only some—turns, lane changes, or starts from a parked position—require a signal."

I agree that the holding isn't directly on point. But the reasoning of the court is applicable if Tristan was "simply following the direct course" of the road that just happened to bend to the right. Mahaffey at 639. The court analogized to driving a mountainous road with numerous switchbacks. Certainly the car is "turning", but in so doing it continues to follow the "direct course" of the road and no signal is required. Id.

I'm really not familiar with the area where Tristan got ticketed, and since the court's reasoning in Mahaffey was very fact specific I can't opine if Mahaffey will help him or not. But Tristan described it as "[A] one lane, right turn only exit. No cross over option. No left turn option. You can only go right." Kind of sounds like he was simply following the "direct course" of the road, doesn't it?

[ShysterJon]

Originally Posted by Sarcastro

I agree that the holding isn't directly on point. But the reasoning of the court is applicable if Tristan was "simply following the direct course" of the road that just happened to bend to the right. Mahaffey at 639. The court analogized to driving a mountainous road with numerous switchbacks. Certainly the car is "turning", but in so doing it continues to follow the "direct course" of the road and no signal is required. Id.

I think the response to that is tristan was on one road and turned onto another road. He wasn't following the direct course of one road.