Traffic Defenders

1 (800) 210 - 7477

Print Media

More and More Drivers Challenge Their Traffic Tickets

Miles Corwin

LA Times April 1, 2000

During an era of controversial, high-profile, televised trials, replete with grandstanding judges, prevaricating police and long- winded lawyers, a recent hearing at the Pasadena courthouse was a refreshing change.

The trial lasted 90 seconds.

Defendant George Bogosian, who was accused of speeding, never said a word.

A Sierra Madre police officer testified that he could not recall whether his patrol car had been parked when he aimed his radar gun at Bogosian's car.

Bogosian's attorney, Lee Rittenburg, then requested that the judge dismiss the case.

The judge granted Rittenburg's request because the accuracy of the radar reading was then in question.

"Gee, is that it?" Bogosian asked Rittenburg, looking incredulous as he wandered into the hallway. "I was expecting some kind of Perry Mason scene."

"That's it," said Rittenburg, one of only a few Southern California lawyers who specialize in traffic cases.

Rittenburg extended his hand. "Congratulations. You won."

Police in California write more tickets today than ever for speeding, traffic experts say, and an increasing percentage of people challenge their tickets.

When Court Commissioner Collette Serio first heard traffic cases a decade ago, she presided over about 10 trials a day; now her day at Pasadena Municipal Court is packed with 20 to 25 cases, from diamond lane infractions to red light violations.

More people fight their tickets, she said, because the cost of tickets and insurance rates for violators have risen sharply. Also, offenders used to be able to attend traffic school an unlimited number of times; now it's restricted to once every 18 months.

Last year, the California Highway Patrol gave drivers almost a million speeding tickets, which is about 165,000 more than officers wrote in 1996. The increase happened primarily because officers began using radar on freeways three years ago, CHP officials say.

With the proliferation of court television shows, Serio said, the courtroom is not as mysterious or intimidating as in the past.

"A lot of people simply want to be heard; they want their day in court," said Serio, who hears only traffic cases one day a week. "For some, they have a point to make. It's a matter of principle."

Principle was certainly the factor for Bogosian. He paid a $500 legal fee to fight a $77 ticket.

Bogosian, 69, is a retired Arcadia middle school history teacher and he always has been an advocate of exercising one's constitutional rights. He is well aware of the 6th Amendment, which guarantees that the accused has the right "to be confronted with the witnesses against him."

"Maybe teaching history and knowing the Constitution make me speak out more," he said. "And in this case, I didn't feel I should have to pay the ticket. I didn't think I was speeding. I wanted a chance to prove it."

At 6:47 a.m. Nov. 4, Bogosian was pulled over, accused of driving 54 mph in a 35 mph zone. It was his third moving violation since he began driving in 1946. He decided that hiring an attorney was his best chance to beat the ticket.

"It did cost me more money than the ticket cost," Bogosian said. "Part of it was, I didn't want my insurance rates to go up. But the main reason was the principle of the thing. Just paying the ticket would be an acknowledgment that I was wrong. I felt I was right."

Only a fraction of offenders in traffic court hire attorneys, Serio said. But defendants such as Bogosian win about half their cases, Serio estimated, compared with about 25% of those without attorneys.

While Rittenburg was a student at Loyola Law School, some classmates wanted the big bucks of corporate law. Others sought the high-pressure world of criminal law. A few philanthropic students planned careers in public interest law. Rittenburg, however, decided to ply his trade in the lowly traffic courts.

Rittenburg, who wore a black suit, off-white shirt and blue and black print silk tie to defend Bogosian, approaches his cases with the intensity of a defense lawyer preparing a three-strikes case. When a reporter asked to observe a brief conference between Bogosian and Rittenburg before the trial, he snapped, "That's attorney-client privilege!"

Earlier, Rittenburg delivered an impassioned discourse on why people who are in the right should fight their traffic tickets. He concluded by intoning somberly: "People have died to ensure our constitutional rights. I say: 'People, exercise those rights!'

Rittenburg, a sole practitioner whose firm, Traffic Defenders, is based at his Alhambra home, charges $500 for standard infractions in local cases. He handles about 200 cases a year, including misdemeanor offenses such as drunk driving and driving with a suspended license. Bogosian considered the money for Rittenburg's fee well spent.

"At first, I was wondering how much time and attention an attorney would put into this case. . . . This is, after all, just a traffic case," Bogosian said. "But he was so serious and well-prepared, I could tell he was going all out for me. He's a competitor and he really wanted to win the case."

Rittenburg decided to specialize in traffic cases when he fought his own speeding ticket during law school. He won, but as he watched others lose winnable cases, he discovered his niche.

"I think this appealed to me because I didn't like the responsibility of taking cases where hundreds of thousands of dollars- -people's nest eggs--were riding on my decisions. I didn't want to take cases where I'd lose sleep because somebody could go to jail because of my actions in the courtroom."

Rittenburg, 45, said the easiest type of ticket to win is a radar speeding ticket on a street. The officer is required to bring to court an engineering and traffic survey, and if the officer does not bring the survey, Rittenburg wins. If the survey was not conducted within the past five years, Rittenburg wins. (To enforce speed limits by radar, state law mandates that cities have traffic and engineering surveys--which are valid for five years--that scientifically determine what the appropriate speed limit should be.)

Rittenburg also might argue that if the radar device had not been calibrated recently, the reading is inaccurate. He might attempt to convince the judge that electrical interference from power lines distorted the radar reading or the officer mistakenly registered the speed of another car.

While representing a client charged with driving 54 mph in a 35- mph zone may not be as critical as arguing a murder case, Rittenburg contends that his work is significant.

"The basic principles of my cases are the same as in big-time trials like the O.J. Simpson case," he said. "The people have the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. That burden of proof is the same, whether a defendant is accused of speeding or murder."

Lawyer Helps Motorists Fight Tickets

Teresa Moreau

The Glendale News Press October 1994

“It sounds like a skit on late night TV”: Lee Rittenburg, Traffic Court Attorney. But it’s for real and this Larry H. Parker of the Southland highways and byways won’t get you $2.1 million, but he can help you prevail in the murky judicial waters of Traffic Court.

“My presence in court ensures that people will be treated fairly when they attempt to exercise their rights to the full extent of the law,” said Attorney Rittenburg who doesn’t have a TV commercial promoting his unusual practice yet.

“I am the McDonald’s of law,” Rittenburg said. "I have to do a high volume to sustain myself because I can only charge so much in good conscience. "

So when you next see those flashing lights beckoning you to pull over, you won’t have to go alone on front of a judge. Now you can call your lawyer, even if you’re only going to traffic court.

Rittenburg got the idea while attending Loyola Law School when he found himself in traffic court after receiving a speeding ticket.

Sitting and waiting for his turn, he watched motorist after motorist leave the courtroom with guilty verdict.

“"I became convinced Traffic Court was designed to primarily find people guilty as efficiently as possible,” he said. “I was discouraged by the way people were herded in front of the judge like cattle on an assembly line and how the judge always seemed to believe the police officers.”

As he sat in the courtroom, Rittenburg began to question whether the adage “innocent until proven guilty” really applied in the world of alleged moving violations.

Not only did he beat his ticket that day, but Rittenburg resolved to make a difference after graduating from law school and passing the bar exam.

Two years ago he opened his law practice, named it Traffic Defenders, and dedicated himself to representing others who want to fight their traffic tickets.

He offers a few helpful hints to those who want to fight, rather than submit to paying the fine:

Show up for trial. It offers a chance at an immediate dismissal since police officers don’t show up 10 percent to 20 percent of the time.

Request that your case be transferred to another court closer to home or work, further diminishing the chances of the officer appearing.

Request postponement. “The advantage to this is that the officers memory might dim by the time you come to trial and if he does not remember actually giving you the ticket, then under evidence law, he can’t testify against you,” Rittenburg said.

It’s also possible that the officer might retire, be fired, be put on leave or be transferred to another division, making his appearance unlikely.

Another recommendation is to be as forgettable as possible at the time the officer issues the citation.

“Do not engage in conversation with the officer because he will remember the incident better, take better notes and be more convincing at the trial as a result of his detailed facts,” Rittenburg said.

The one thing to do at the trial is to test the officer’s memory and get him to admit he doesn’t remember.

Melissa Scrivner, who drives an 18-wheeler up and down the West Coast, was recently represented by Rittenburg.

A Department of Transportation officer pulled her over for a burned-out taillight, which Scrivner fixed on the spot, yet the officer cited her for not keeping her log book current, a serious offense for professional truck drivers.

Scrivner notified her insurance company which hires representitives to appear in court for the drivers.

“Mr Rittenburg called me immediately, showing he was willing to help. He went into court and the charges were dropped. I was in Georgia when I called him back. I never met him, but I would like to,” Scrivner said.

Rittenburg’s legal fees fluctuate, depending on the offense and how far he has to travel to court.

Knowing Law Can Help You Beat Speeding Ticket

By Todd Vanderwerff

Sunday, November 25, 2007

The Press Enterprise

Maybe you don’t want to pay that speeding ticket. Or maybe you’re teetering on the edge of having your license suspended.

Either way, Lee Rittenburg of Traffic Defenders, a law office in San Bernardino, says you can beat that ticket, even without hiring an attorney. But you’re going to need an understanding of the law, a bit of your time and just a smidgen of luck.

It’s easier to beat the rap on a ticket you received on a surface street than on a freeway. Speed limits on surface streets are called basic speed limits, and even if your speed is clocked on radar, there are ways to fight it.

Rittenburg says that the basic speed law doesn’t say you can’t go faster than the posted speed, but it does say that you can’t go faster than is reasonable. To that end, he says, it must be proved that you were going faster than what was reasonable for the time. Even then, there are other possible defenses.

“In any ticket involving radar or laser, the officer has to bring in the engineering and traffic survey to justify the posted speed limit in the area where you got your ticket,” Rittenburg says. That survey must be dated in the last 5 years.

On the freeway, tickets are harder to fight, Rittenburg says, but you can try to attack the method of measurement, especially if your speed was measured by radar.

Rittenburg recommends going to court on tickets anyway. If the police officer who issued the ticket doesn’t show up, the case will be dismissed. If he or she does show up, it’s easy to change your plea to guilty and pay the fine.

Just the Ticket

Traffic Defenders of San Bernardino Helps Errant Drivers Out of a Jam

Deborah Rosenthal

California Lawyer December 2004

Like many of his peers, San Bernardino Attorney, Lee Rittenburg went to law school knowing that he wanted to help people but not knowing exactly how. He found his career path while still a student. Rittenburg’s epiphany came during his third year at Loyala Law School in Los Angeles, but it didn’t come from a professor he admired or a class that inspired him to pursue a particular field. It came when he got a speeding ticket and went to traffic court to fight it.

“I used what I learned in my evidence class to get the calibration certificate for the radar device excluded,” he says. “There were 15-20 cases before mine and everybody lost. And you got the feeling that people didn’t feel like they got a fair shake. So I realized there was a niche there, and I’ve been making a living at it ever since.”

To find clients, Rittenburg advertises his business, Traffic Defenders, in 19 county yellow pages and on display billboards at car washes. He’s also made guest appearances on a handful of radio and television shows. “I don’t have a problem giving people a limited amount of free advice, because I think people should exercise their legal rights,” he says. “But I also tell people, ‘No matter how good you are, you’re not going to argue with the same effectiveness or competence as an experienced lawyer.’”

Indeed, concentrating almost exclusively on traffic law for the past twelve years has allowed Rittenburg to develop a rare body of knowledge that could benefit clients that are trying to escape liability. For example, in any case involving radar or laser, the officer must bring to court an engineering or traffic survey to justify the speed limit in that area. “If the cop doesn’t bring it, or if it’s not dated in the last five years, you win.” Rittenburg says. Generally, police officers fail to show in about 10-20 percent of traffic cases, and a driver can increase the odds of a no-show by requesting a hearing in the county seat, which might be in a court that requires the officer to travel a much further distance. And even under the basic speed law when the driver has exceeded the posted speed limit, the burden of proof lies with the officer to show that the person drove unreasonably under the circumstances. “Often the officer will not address all the elements of the offense, such as driving unreasonably so as to endanger people or property, and then you have a due process argument,” Rittenburg says.

Generally, Rittenburg's clients fall into three groups. The majority are people who fight tickets to keep their insurance rates down or keep from losing their driver’s licenses. “Every point that goes on your record stays on your record for insurance purposes for 37 months and can raise your premiums thousands of dollars,” he explains. “Also, noncommercial drivers who get four points in a twelve-month period get their license suspended for six months.” Other clients include commercial drivers, whose jobs would be jeopardized if they got even a single ticket, and “the people who just gosh darn didn’t do it,” he says. "I’ll take a DU,I” he adds, “but that’s not my passion.”

Rittenburg wins an estimated 90 percent of his radar and basic speeding cases, though, unlike trial lawyers with a lower success rate, Rittenburg is often unopposed in court. He does, however, particularly enjoy the rare case that’s argued by a city attorney or district attorney. “It’s a lot more fun for me,” he says. It also creates an opportunity to negotiate a settlement. “Sometimes you can reduce a speeding ticket to a coasting ticket, which is a zero-point violation,"

Nor is Rittenburg’s practice limited to trial work. He has also argued several appeals and won. Once he got a speed trap case reversed when an appellate court found that the engineering and traffic survey of the area did not justify the posted speed limit on the relevant stretch of road. And in another case, when the defendant was charged with turning left where a no left turn sign was posted, Rittenburg successfully proved that the sign failed to conform to uniform standards for official traffic-control devices, so the defendant did not have proper notice of the law she was accused of violating.

Although he gets a lot of repeat customers, and many clients find him through word of mouth, Rittenburg admits that he needs to maintain a large client base to stay afloat and that his rate is “bottom of the barrel compared to what other California lawyers charge for their trial work.” He charges a flat fee of $750 for standard one-point tickets that require him to travel no more farther than an hour and a half drive from his base in San Bernardino. For offenses that carry higher penalties, such as reckless driving or driving on a suspended license with fines as high as $3,400 – he can charge more and still potentially save his client thousands of dollars. And he keeps his costs low by working out of his home and having no staff.

Defending people who get traffic tickets may not be as lucrative as personal injury law, but Rittenburg says it’s exactly the kind of rewarding public service he envisioned doing as a lawyer. “Traffic Court is really where most people come into contact with the criminal justice system,” he says.

Fight That Ticket, Says SB Attorney

By Joe Nelson

Staff Writer

San Bernardino Sun January 1, 2002

SAN BERNARDINO – Lee Rittenburg has carved himself a niche in the legal profession, defending traffic tickets for people who cannot afford to have points on their driving records.

His clients include truck, bus and taxi drivers.

Business is booming for Rittenburg 46, of San Bernardino who started Traffic Defenders Inc. in 1992.

“My phone just keeps ringing. Business is great,” he said from an office in the 3000 square-foot hillside home he recently purchased overlooking the city’s East Side.

Rittenburg has defended traffic tickets in San Bernardino, Riverside, Los Angeles and Orange counties. In most cases he and his client have walked away from courtrooms victorious.

The Loyola Law School graduate says he wins 7 of 10 cases. Ten to twenty percent of the time he said, officers who issued the tickets do not show up in court – providing grounds for automatic dismissal.

Rittenburg said people are more than willing to pay the $750 he charges. Some even pay up to $4,000 to appeal a conviction rather than pay a smaller fine and have a point on their driving record.

Michael Lonker, 57, a Northridge resident who works as an exterminator, has utilized Rittenburg’s services five times. All five tickets either were dismissed or reversed on appeal.

“All I can say about Lee is he is so entertaining in the courtroom,” Lonker says.”He wears everybody down. You might as well consider it a murder case. He just wears down the judges. He really knows his stuff.”

Rittenburg’s law library consists of the California Vehicle and Evidence Codes, the only two books he ever takes to court. He says he knows both “backward and forward.”

The former stockbroker decided that defending traffic tickets was going to be his forte after contesting a speeding ticket he got while attending law school.

“I was amazed by the laissez faire, assembly line process of how traffic tickets are dealt with in the courts,” he said. Rittenburg says he sat in the courtroom that day, watching as people went before the judge to plead guilty.

“I got the feeling it was like a cattle call, and most importantly, everybody lost.”

Rittenburg fought his ticket. He got radar evidence thrown out because he argued successfully that the calibration certificates of the radar device amounted to hearsay evidence.

With radar evidence gone, the case against him became quite shaky. The officer who had issued the ticket tried to argue that he could tell from visual observation that Rittenburg was speeding.

“I argued that visual estimates are not proof beyond a reasonable doubt,” Rittenburg said.

The judge dismissed the case, and Rittenburg knew he had something.

In a San Bernardino County speeding case that Rittenburg won on appeal, Judge Peter H. Norell, of the San Bernardino County Superior Court in Rancho Cucamonga, wrote in a June 1999 opinion: “The people offered no evidence concerning the weather, visibility , traffic, or condition of the road, from which a reasonable speed might be inferred, nor any evidence suggesting anyone or anything was in endangered.”

That opinion is an echo of other findings in favor of Rittenburg’s clients on the basis of vehicle code section 22350, the state law on speeding. It reads: “No person shall drive a vehicle upon a highway at a speed that is greater than is reasonable or prudent having due regard for weather, visibility, the traffic on, and the surface width of, the highway, and in event at a speed which endangers the safety of persons or property.”

Law enforcement officers often fail to prove that a driver’s speed was not “reasonable or prudent,” Rittenburg said.

Rittenburg offer other strategies for fighting traffic tickets:

Request that your case be transferred to a court closer to home or work. This forces the officer who issued the ticket to drive to that location, further reducing the chances the officer will appear in cout.

Request postponement of the trial. This increases the chances of the officer's memory diminishing, and under evidence law, if an officer can't remember giving you a ticket or the circumstances for which he or she issued the ticket, the officer cannot testify against you in court.

Rittenburg believes everyone should fight traffic tickets, and everyone who does must prepare before going to court.

“Even if you don’t get an attorney, research the laws and be prepared – just in case,” he said. “Who knows, the officer may not even show up.”

Tips for Ticket Drivers

Attorney Lee Rittenburg Has These Tips For Motorists Who Get a Traffic Ticket:

Be courteous to the police officer. As Rittenburg puts it, “be as forgettable as possible." If the officer remembers you, he’ll take better notes and that will help him refresh his recollection when he goes to court.”

As the officer writes up the ticket, request that the case be sent to the County Seat. In San Bernardino County, that means San Bernardino Superior Court. Requesting the County Seat when the ticket is written in another portion of the county can remove the officer’s “home-court advantage” and force him to appear in court many miles from his beat.

Once you receive the ticket, carefully read the vehicle code section for which you have been cited. Then read the definitions of the terms used in the code section. “A little research could give you an idea of what legal avenues you have to fight the ticket,” Rittenburg said.

When you get to court, remember the burden of proof is on the other side. “They have to prove all the elements of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt,” Rittenburg said.

If it’s inconvenient to go to court, try a trial by written declaration. You and the officer submit declarations upon which the judge makes a ruling. If you win, the case is dismissed. If you lose, you still have the right to request an in-person trial. “It’s a way of getting two bites out of the apple, or two chances to win,” Rittenburg said.

David F. Cardoza

More Than One Route Leads to Loss of License

Sharon Bernstein

LA Times July 29, 2003

At 77, Marjorie DePaola is still working at the Orange County craft store where she has led art classes and tended the cash registers for years, and is still piloting her Toyota Echo to and from the shop, on errands and to visit friends.

But a couple of years ago, she temporarily lost that mobility after a police officer reported her to the state Department of Motor Vehicles for unsafe driving.

Her experience highlights the importance of knowing the system and knowing what to do if your driving privileges are threatened.

DePaola had hit a parked car while driving to a friend's house near her home in Placentia. In his report, the officer cited his concern that, at the scene, she said "just that she looked up" and saw the parked car in front of her.

DePaola later argued successfully that she had hit the car, which she said was sticking out into the street, rather than swerved and hit moving vehicles to her left.

But the accident and the officer's report set off a chain of events that led to the revocation of her driver's license for a period. (It was later reinstated.)

"It was the worst time of my life," DePaola said. "I just didn't know how to handle it."

Shortly after the accident, she was notified that the officer had reported her to the DMV as a potentially unsafe driver.

She was asked to go to one of the department's driver safety offices for driving tests and a hearing check.

DePaola took the written driving exam and passed it easily. She also passed the vision test.

Her doctor attested that she had no medical conditions that would make her an unsafe driver -- that she did not suffer seizures, blackouts or confusion.

But she was so nervous taking the driving test that she failed it, according to DePaola and her attorney. (The officer said she drove too slowly and exhibited "overall unsafe driving," according to the report.)

And DePaola said she unintentionally antagonized the hearing officer by declining to report that she had had heart surgery a few years previously, figuring that the information was personal and unrelated to driving.

"She kept repeating that I hadn't been truthful with her and that I hadn't told her my entire medical history," DePaola said. "I've had a lot of medical history, but that's between me and God."

A few days later, uniformed sheriff's deputies showed up at her house with a summons. The document ordered her to forfeit her license to the DMV.

DePaola hired a lawyer. Lee Rittenburg, a San Bernardino-based attorney who runs a firm called Traffic Defenders, won her a new hearing. He also suggested that she take some driving lessons.

A few months later, DePaola's license was reinstated.

"We explained to the hearing officer that she didn't tell the officer about the poorly parked car because she was so shaken up," Rittenburg said.

That argument, and the fact that DePaola had passed the driving test on her second try, won the day.

So what are the circumstances under which someone's license could be threatened? And what would probably happen?

Following are some basic questions and answers.

Q: Can my age trigger an automatic reassessment of my driving skills?

A: Under California law, all drivers older than 70 must renew their licenses in person.

This means that they will have to go to a local DMV office and take a written test and a vision test, but not necessarily a driving test, said department spokesman Steve Haskins.

Renewals for elderly drivers are every five years, the same as for younger drivers, unless they have an obvious condition that would cause their driving ability to deteriorate rapidly.

Q: Is it true that anybody can report me to the DMV for unsafe driving?

A: Anyone can report an unsafe driver, but the DMV is only required to act if the person making the report is a close blood relative, spouse, police officer or doctor, Haskins said.

Reports must be in writing, with forms available on the DMV's Web site at www.dmv.ca. gov/forms/ds/ds699.htm. They must be signed and dated.