Has anyone heard of "prima facie" limits?
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 1
From: Texas
Has anyone heard of "prima facie" limits?
Anyone have any experience fighting speeding tickets based on the fact that Texas speed limits are "Prima Facie". Basically it states that the limits are not absolute limits, but best under normal conditions. Let me begin by saying I've already settled my ticket (12mph over on the highway) and am having it deferred, but I'd still like to see if anyone has tried arguing this defense. Let me catch everyone up on the concept of prima facie limits:
Emphasis mine
This quote came directly from TXDot's Procedures for Establishing Speed Zones. The way I understand the above is that during the proper conditions (weather, road, surroundings, and the vehicle/driver) it is not necessarily a violation of the law when exceeding the speed limit. What I don't know is how much is too much. I did a little more searching and found this section which describes the conditions the DOT views as affecting the safety of a given speed.
Here are the key points:
Design and Physical Factors of the Roadway
The Vehicle
The Driver
Traffic
Weather and Visibility
It would appear to me that if you could provide enough proof that you could argue that the speed you were travelling at was reasonable and prudent. Please remember that my ticket has already been handled, but I'll use it as an example of what would have been my arguments had I decided to fight it:
Anyways, even if no one has tried arguing this, what do you think of its possibility as a defense?
Prima Facie Concept
szn_coltraff_b010005
In Texas, all speed limits are considered "prima facie" limits. Prima facie limits are those limits that, "on the face of it," are reasonable and prudent under normal conditions. To exceed a prima facie speed limit does not automatically constitute an infraction of the law, as reasonable and prudent driving behavior is, at times, possible at speeds in excess of the posted limit. However, the burden of proof of reasonable and prudent conduct under the existing conditions rests with the driver. To afford a driver this opportunity to exceed a prima facie speed limit recognizes the fact that any posted speed limit cannot adequately reflect the many different road conditions confronting the driver on the same highways at different times.
szn_coltraff_b010005
In Texas, all speed limits are considered "prima facie" limits. Prima facie limits are those limits that, "on the face of it," are reasonable and prudent under normal conditions. To exceed a prima facie speed limit does not automatically constitute an infraction of the law, as reasonable and prudent driving behavior is, at times, possible at speeds in excess of the posted limit. However, the burden of proof of reasonable and prudent conduct under the existing conditions rests with the driver. To afford a driver this opportunity to exceed a prima facie speed limit recognizes the fact that any posted speed limit cannot adequately reflect the many different road conditions confronting the driver on the same highways at different times.
This quote came directly from TXDot's Procedures for Establishing Speed Zones. The way I understand the above is that during the proper conditions (weather, road, surroundings, and the vehicle/driver) it is not necessarily a violation of the law when exceeding the speed limit. What I don't know is how much is too much. I did a little more searching and found this section which describes the conditions the DOT views as affecting the safety of a given speed.
Here are the key points:
Design and Physical Factors of the Roadway
The Vehicle
The Driver
Traffic
Weather and Visibility
It would appear to me that if you could provide enough proof that you could argue that the speed you were travelling at was reasonable and prudent. Please remember that my ticket has already been handled, but I'll use it as an example of what would have been my arguments had I decided to fight it:
Design and Physical Factors of the Roadway: Area where incident was observed was a straight 2-lane divided highway with very slight incline, road conditon was excellent
The Vehicle: This part would be more subjective, I drive an '01 Z28 with a very tightly documented maintenance schedule. When compared to the majority of other cars on the highway, the Camaro has better accident avoidance ability in terms of stopping and controlling sudden turns. This was demonstrated in front of the officer as he crossed the median. Fearing it was a regular car crossing over, I was able to completely stop my vehicle in order to avoid him. This was at 11:00p so I could only see headlights. A little further explanation: After clocking, he crossed the median expecting me to drive past him, then he would catch up and ticket, I saw his headlights leave the oncoming roadway and was able to stop before what I thought would be an accident.
The Driver: While it was 11:00p, I was still responsive enough to pick up on a car leaving the roadway. Also, my record has no tickets and have never been in an accident. (And after the deferrment passes, this ticket will be dismissed).
Traffic: The reason I stopped on the highway was because there were no other cars on the highway. Had there been other cars, I would have done something else. This was coming back from West Texas and cars averaged 1/2 mile to a mile apart. I was travelling at 77, others (mainly 18-wheelers) were travelling 75-74.
Weather and Visibility: Weather was dry, it hasn't rained in at least two weeks, visibility was unlimited. And another subjective matter, it was at night, Personally, I prefer driving at night, because every car is illuminated and you can see them for many more miles than had it been daylight. Plus reflective lanes help define the road.
The Vehicle: This part would be more subjective, I drive an '01 Z28 with a very tightly documented maintenance schedule. When compared to the majority of other cars on the highway, the Camaro has better accident avoidance ability in terms of stopping and controlling sudden turns. This was demonstrated in front of the officer as he crossed the median. Fearing it was a regular car crossing over, I was able to completely stop my vehicle in order to avoid him. This was at 11:00p so I could only see headlights. A little further explanation: After clocking, he crossed the median expecting me to drive past him, then he would catch up and ticket, I saw his headlights leave the oncoming roadway and was able to stop before what I thought would be an accident.
The Driver: While it was 11:00p, I was still responsive enough to pick up on a car leaving the roadway. Also, my record has no tickets and have never been in an accident. (And after the deferrment passes, this ticket will be dismissed).
Traffic: The reason I stopped on the highway was because there were no other cars on the highway. Had there been other cars, I would have done something else. This was coming back from West Texas and cars averaged 1/2 mile to a mile apart. I was travelling at 77, others (mainly 18-wheelers) were travelling 75-74.
Weather and Visibility: Weather was dry, it hasn't rained in at least two weeks, visibility was unlimited. And another subjective matter, it was at night, Personally, I prefer driving at night, because every car is illuminated and you can see them for many more miles than had it been daylight. Plus reflective lanes help define the road.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 3,768
From: Friendswood, TX, USA
Re: Has anyone heard of "prima facie" limits?
I've never tried this or know of anyone that has. But it should be obvious that in order to prove something you need scientific data, not your belief, that your car is better. That means tests, very expensive test. Then you have the additional problem of it being at night, which brings your physiology into the equation. you can fight city hall, but you'd better have lots and lots of money.
Registered User
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 2,779
From: Denton, TX
Re: Has anyone heard of "prima facie" limits?
Nope. Never heard.
However, if it would as easy to use as you describe, I'm sure we would all have heard about it by now, don't you think?
I think Z28SORR said it all. If you have time, money and persistence, go ahead and try it. The let us all know how it went.
TS
However, if it would as easy to use as you describe, I'm sure we would all have heard about it by now, don't you think?
I think Z28SORR said it all. If you have time, money and persistence, go ahead and try it. The let us all know how it went.
TS
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 12
From: AUSTIN,TEXAS
Re: Has anyone heard of "prima facie" limits?
The question you have to ask is what is normal and prudent defined by txdot on all of the above: weather,car,driver and traffic. What one person considers normal and prudent might seem abnormal and uncessary to someone else. Just my .02
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 269
From: Wichita Falls, TX
Re: Has anyone heard of "prima facie" limits?
As I understand the law, it would apply to such instances where travelling the speed limit would impede traffic and thus speeding in order to flow with traffic would not necessarily be illegal. We have all been caught in heavy expressway traffic that was flowing from 5 to 10 mph over the posted limit. You have two choices, #1 you drive the posted speed limit and by doing so you interrupt the flow of traffic and you become a traffic hazard, or #2 you flow with traffic so as not to impede it's flow but in doing so you must exceed the posted limit. I personally don't know any police officers who would write speeding tickets for speeding while flowing with HEAVY traffic but if a citation was issued it would be a legal citation but your defense MIGHT work in that instance based on the safety aspect.
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 2
From: Arlington, TX
Re: Has anyone heard of "prima facie" limits?
Bottom line, unless you can prove that you are more qualified to determine safe maximum speed than the traffic engineer that the state has already certified as to be an "expert" on speed limits.......It's an unbeatable loophole.
Even the "there was no traffic around" argument isn't deployable as the D/A can rebuttal with the argument "the limit is in place not only to protect other driver's but the driver of the vehicle in question, also".
Sorry I couldn't be more help!
Even the "there was no traffic around" argument isn't deployable as the D/A can rebuttal with the argument "the limit is in place not only to protect other driver's but the driver of the vehicle in question, also".
Sorry I couldn't be more help!
Registered User
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 1,096
From: College Station,Texas/ Oklahoma City, OK
Re: Has anyone heard of "prima facie" limits?
Look up previous case law on the subject and see what factors/elements if any courts have considered when deciding on this matter...it is not as simple as reading a rule and arguing your point of view.... I wish it were that easy
My prediction: it would take one hell of a reason to justify going faster than posted...policy considerations being the first OBVIOUS reason
Imagine the burden on law officials, city, etc if anyone who thought they were Dale Earnhardt and drove a car they considered "a cut above the rest" were protected by such statute.... again, common sense tells me there better be a HELL OF A GOOD REASON for the speeding and that courts have probably interpreted this rule and set out strict criteria for its application...
Finally, have you looked to see to whom the privilege of raising or lowering a speed limit applies to under this procedure? The scope of the procedure’s application? I have not checked and have no inclination to do so.... just giving you an idea on some more things to consider...
Good luck
My prediction: it would take one hell of a reason to justify going faster than posted...policy considerations being the first OBVIOUS reason
Imagine the burden on law officials, city, etc if anyone who thought they were Dale Earnhardt and drove a car they considered "a cut above the rest" were protected by such statute.... again, common sense tells me there better be a HELL OF A GOOD REASON for the speeding and that courts have probably interpreted this rule and set out strict criteria for its application...
Finally, have you looked to see to whom the privilege of raising or lowering a speed limit applies to under this procedure? The scope of the procedure’s application? I have not checked and have no inclination to do so.... just giving you an idea on some more things to consider...
Good luck
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
autoxr166
General 1967-2002 F-Body Tech
0
Sep 25, 2015 04:21 PM
PFYC
Supporting Vendor Group Purchases and Sales
0
Sep 11, 2015 09:44 AM