Article from: www.thenewspaper.com/news/00/65.asp
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
In re: Red Light Camera Cases The People of the State of California, Plaintiff, v. John Allen, et al., Defendants.
In re: Red Light Camera Cases CASE NO. 579275D
ORDER EXCLUDING EVIDENCE
Plaintiff, The People of the State of California, V.John Allen, et al.,
The prosecution's arguments have not persuaded the Court to change its
ruling. The prosecution relies on People v. Adams (1976)59 Cal.App.3d 559
and the cases following it for the proposition that failure to follow the
statute only goes to the weight of the evidence and not to its
inadmissibility. As pointed out in People v. Williams (2001) 89 Cal.App.4th
85 at 100,
Adams and its progeny were crafted to address anomalies or occasional errors and innocent lapses in law enforcement. They were not meant to
provide a means for peace officers and their agencies to ignore clear, easy-to-apply statutory law and administrative rules, for any reason, including budget or personnel constraints.
In this case, the failure of the city to operate the system as required by
the legislature, combined with the contingent fee paid to Lockheed Martin goes far beyond Adams or any of the cases which follow Adams. The Court
sees no difference between a contingent fee to a private corporation and a contingent fee paid to an individual.
Therefore, the Court's ruling will stand. The evidence from the red light
cameras will not be admitted.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED; September 4, 2001
Ronald L. Styn
Judge of the Superior Court