Decatur Electronics GHD, Руководство пользователя

Страница: 34 / 41

GHD
TM
& SCOUT
TM
USER’S MANUAL
32
11.2 Radar Case Law
Judicial notice is an elementary principal of law. The principal
applies to facts that are common knowledge and states that it is
not necessary to introduce evidence to prove what is common
knowledge.
The following landmark rulings have made it simpler to introduce
radar speed measurements as evidence.
1. State v. Dantonio, June 1995, State of New Jersey
The New Jersey Supreme Court took judicial notice of the
Doppler Principle. Other states quickly followed.
2. State v. Tomanelli, 1966
The court pointed out that while the tuning fork testing method is
acceptable, the result of the test is only as good as the tuning fork
used.
3. Honeycutt v. Commonwealth, 1966
The court ruled that it is sufficient for an officer to have enough
knowledge and training to properly:
• Setup radar.
• Test its accuracy.
• Read the instrument to obtain the speed measurement.
4. State v. Hanson, 1978
The court decreed that the officer must be able to testify:
• To having had adequate training and experience in the operation
of moving radar.
• That the moving radar instrument was in proper working order
and that its testing had followed suggested methods.
• That the instrument was used in an area where road conditions
presented only the minimum possibility of distortion.
• That the patrol car’s speed was verified.
• That the instrument was expertly tested soon after the arrest and
that the testing did not rely on the instrument’s own internal
circuit testing.