I was stopped by an officer that claimed I sped over a 30mph speed limit. When he saw that I have a radar detector, he proceeded to "cut me a break" and gave me a ticket for "failed to signal" (but I did use my signal, and the officer knows it).
He did not use radar (my radar detector would have indicated otherwise) and I was in the lead among other cars. I wasn't speeding, but accelerated faster than the other cars. It seems to me that he realized that he may not have a strong argument in court when he saw my radar. Therefore, I received a citation that was different than the one I was stopped for.
How would a typical case like this play out in court (generalized)? Would he tell the truth, and if he does, would that means the case would be dismissed on the grounds that I did not violate the law in which the citation has stated? (I would probably use "motion to summary judgement" if this happens.)
RESULTS from my case:
First Trial: Officer did not show up (did not give a reason). The Judge offered a continuance to the officer. Case postponed. (NYS penal code states along the lines that if the officer did not give a reason for missing the court date or is not one of the few exceptions for missing the date, case should be dismissed. However, in my case it wasn't. Perhaps the judge had the final say regarding this matter.
2nd Trial: Officer did not show up. Prosecutor tried to get me to come back. However, I mentioned the continuance is final and that the officer not showing up means there is no witness against me. I got my hearing in front of the judge and the case was dismissed.
Notes: After going through this ordeal, I realized that the prosecutors were really out to get people to agree to plea bargains. Even going as for as lying to me the officer was present to get me to sign a plea.