The police will often will cite you for not stopping long enough at a stop sign. However the stop sign code, CVC 22450, does not require you to stop for any specific period of time. It merely requires that a driver actually “stop.”
A “stop” is defined in CVC 587 Stop or Stopping: “Stop or stopping… shall mean any cessation of movement of a vehicle.”
Most officer’s will state that you should stop for 3-5 seconds, but a “stop” is defined in the vehicle code as “any cessation of movement;” no specific time period is specified. If you stop for a brief moment, the law recognizes this as a stop.
Many cops will site you because they did not see you stop. This is also why they tell you to stop for 3-5 seconds, to give them time to look and verify that you stopped. This is bullshit. The law clearly states that “any” cessation of mom event constitutes a stop. Cops should only cite you if they see you “not stop.”
Many cops guess that you didn’t stop from their concealed position around the corner at an intersection. Since they know that 80% of drivers do not stop at an uncontested intersection, they will assume that you also did not stop, even if it is impossible to see this from their position. In this way many drivers who do stop are cited based on a false assumption on the officer’s part.
For directions on how to use this document, click here.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
Defendant’s Name: James Joyce
Case No.: S780824
I respectfully submit this written declaration to the Court pursuant to CVC 40902. I plead Not Guilty to the charge of violating CVC 22450(a).
The facts of my case are as follows: While driving down Robinson avenue with a friend on 8-9-99 at approximately 10:30pm, I came to a brief stop at a stop sign at the intersection of Robinson and 10th Avenue. After my stop, I proceeded through the intersection. Shortly thereafter, I was stopped by SDPD officer Puerco (I.D.#1234) and was charged with violating CVC 22450(a) which the officer wrote on my Notice to Appear as “22450(a) VC Fail to stop for stop sign.”
I told the officer that I had stopped at the limit line as required. The Officer agreed and said: “You stopped, but you didn’t stop long enough.” The officer seemed to indicate in this statement that he wanted me to stop for a longer period of time than I actually had.
In the California Vehicle Code, the required length of time for a stop is defined in CVC 587 Stop or Stopping: “Stop or stopping… shall mean any cessation of movement of a vehicle.”
I believe that “any” cessation of movement would certainly include the brief stop I made. Officer Puerco, by his statement to me, seems to believe that a set time period for a stop is required though no such set time length is actually provided for in the law.
Since many drivers do not stop at all at an uncontested stop, Officer Puerco may have not had time to perceive my brief stop from his vantage point and, looking up as I entered the intersection after I stopped, may have assumed that I did not stop. Certainly, the lack of visibility at night in this poorly lit intersection could only have made my stop more difficult for the officer to see. Had I stopped for a longer period of time as the Officer wanted me to, I believe that he would have been more likely to have perceived that I did, in fact, stop. However, since the law does not require me to stop for longer than I actually did (“any” cessation of movement) and since Officer Puerco may have cited me under the false assumption that a specific length of time must pass to constitute a “stop” (though none is provided for in the law) I ask the Court to dismiss my citation in the interest of justice.
If the court does not find in my favor in this case, I request a Trial de Novo.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.
( date )
( signature )
( name typed out )