Home >Camera Enforcement > Red Light Cameras > South Dakota Court Rejects City Appeals Process

Related News California: Red Light Camera Refunds Reach $3.1 Million Florida: Red Light Camera Lobbyist Fails To Register Louisiana Lawmaker Proposes Local Votes For All Traffic Camera Programs Washington: Federal Judge Saves State Camera Program Missouri Supreme Court Strikes Down Red Light Cameras View Main Topics: Camera Enforcement    Speed Cameras    Red Light Cameras    Revenue from Cameras    Camera Accuracy    Engineering/Signals Police Enforcement    Random Checkpoints    Speed Limits/Traps    Tickets and Cash    Seizure/Confiscation    Parking Tickets    Taxes and Tolls    Drunk Driving Laws Miscellaneous Issues    Miscellaneous    Hypocrisy    Bad Policy and Injustice    Propaganda    New Technologies    Privacy Issues The Revolt    Protests    Camera Destruction Subscribe via RSS or E-Mail Back To Front Page

1/29/2007 South Dakota Court Rejects City Appeals Process Appeals process in Sioux Falls, South Dakota used for red light camera and other cases found to violate state law. A circuit court judge earlier this month struck down as unfair the administrative appeals process used for red light camera citations and other ticketing within the city of Sioux Falls, South Dakota. Daniels Construction brought suit against Sioux Falls. The company had appealed an $8100 fine levied by the city to a city hearing officer who ruled that the company had to pay the city. The wording of the ordinance under which Daniels was fined suggested that a hearing officer's decision could be appealed to circuit court. Once the company challenged the city in circuit court, Sioux Falls argued that the court had no jurisdiction to consider the case or overturn the fine. Judge William J. Srstka, Jr found the procedure unlawful. "The city advises of the right to appeal, and then shows up in court to oppose that right," Srstka wrote. "The city is guaranteeing a right to appeal that does not exist." Beginning July 1, the city will be forced either to change its ordinance or change the state constitution. Daniels Construction's lawyer, Paul Linde, feared a new ordinance would merely provide a method of review controlled by the city. "They hire the hearing examiner, they pay the hearing examiner, and the hearing examiner typically rules in their favor," Linde told the Argus Leader newspaper. "What they want is all the administrative appeals to go to the hearing examiners, and then you get a rubber stamp on their ruling." Source: Judge: City violates state law (Argus Leader (SD), 1/29/2007) Regional News: Other news about Sioux Falls, South Dakota Permanent Link for this item Return to Front Page

Front Page | Get Updates | Site Map | News Achive | Search | theNewspaper.com: A journal of the politics of driving