Wrong Citation - 21460 (a) vs. 21651

[skari]

Pulled into a gas station in Vallejo, CA (just passing through officer) and crossed a double-double (divider) that signifies a "barrier". Officer on trap patrol cited me: The citation states 21460 (a) which is crossing a double yellow line, not crossing double-double. CVC 21460 allows crossing double yellows when turning into intersections or driveways, which is what I was doing, except for the extra yellow lines. The officers written description next to the code and section is "double-double yellow divider". Is this a winner? , or will the written description stand up? The patrol trap occurs monthly according to the gas station attendant...six cars towed last month.

 

[CdwJava]

You cannot cross over an "island" (which is what the double set of double yellows represents) to make a turn even into a driveway.

The section allows the turn if there are broken lines within ...

21460. (a) When double parallel solid lines are in place, no person
driving a vehicle shall drive to the left thereof, except as
permitted in this section.
(b) When the double parallel lines, one of which is broken, are in
place, no person driving a vehicle shall drive to the left thereof,
except as follows:
(1) That the driver on that side of the roadway in which the
broken line is in place may cross over the double line or drive to
the left thereof when overtaking or passing other vehicles.
(2) As provided in Section 21460.5.
(c) Either of the markings as specified in subdivision (a) or (b)
does not prohibit a driver from crossing the marking when (1) turning
to the left at any intersection or into or out of a driveway or
private road, or (2) making a U-turn under the rules governing that
turn, and either of the markings shall be disregarded when authorized
signs have been erected designating offcenter traffic lanes as
permitted under Section 21657.
(d) Raised pavement markers may be used to simulate painted lines
described in this section when the markers are placed in accordance
with standards established by the Department of Transportation.​

The description written on the citation is not what you have been charged with - the code section is. And, when you go to court, the officer will presumably articulate the circumstances of the violation - the written comment on the cite is not relevant.

I, personally, would have gone for the 21651 section ... but, if you drove to the left of the yellow lines by making a turn through it, so be it.

- Carl

 

[skari]

Thanks for answering - I agree; if I was cited 21651, I wouldn't have gotten any of my hopes up.
I've seen in other forums that the officer may change the violation almost at any time. Can the officer "correct" his code violation cited during the course of a trial?
Thx,
Stuart

 

[CdwJava]

The court should NOT allow him to change it, but this has been known to happen. Generally, the officer or prosecution should amend the violation BEFORE trial.

However, while 21651 might have been the better charge from what it sounds, this does NOT mean that 21460 is not also appropriate. There are many instances in the CVC where more than one section might apply to the same bad act.

- Carl