|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ROBERT L. EHRLICH, JR., Governor Ch. 15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2) THE LOCAL POLICE DEPARTMENT MAY MAIL A WARNING NOTICE
INSTEAD OF A CITATION TO THE OWNER LIABLE UNDER SUBSECTION (C) OF THIS
SECTION.
(3) EXCEPT AS PROVIDED IN SUBSECTION (F)(4) OF THIS SECTION, THE
LOCAL POLICE DEPARTMENT MAY NOT MAIL A CITATION TO A PERSON WHO IS NOT
AN OWNER
(4) EXCEPT AS PROVIDED IN SUBSECTION (F)(4) OF THIS SECTION, A
CITATION ISSUED UNDER THIS SECTION SHALL BE MAILED NO LATER THAN 2 WEEKS
AFTER THE ALLEGED VIOLATION IF THE VEHICLE IS REGISTERED IN THIS STATE,
AND 30 DAYS AFTER THE ALLEGED VIOLATION IF THE VEHICLE IS REGISTERED IN
ANOTHER STATE.
(5) A PERSON WHO RECEIVES A CITATION UNDER PARAGRAPH (1) OF
THIS SUBSECTION MAY:
(I) PAY THE CIVIL PENALTY, IN ACCORDANCE WITH
INSTRUCTIONS ON THE CITATION, DIRECTLY TO THE MONTGOMERY COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE; OR
(II) ELECT TO STAND TRIAL IN THE DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
ALLEGED VIOLATION.
(E) (1) A CERTIFICATE ALLEGING THAT THE VIOLATION OF THIS SUBTITLE
OCCURRED AND THE REQUIREMENTS UNDER SUBSECTION (B) OF THIS SECTION
HAVE BEEN SATISFIED, SWORN TO, OR AFFIRMED BY A DULY AUTHORIZED AGENT OF
THE LOCAL POLICE DEPARTMENT, BASED ON INSPECTION OF RECORDED IMAGES
PRODUCED BY A SPEED MONITORING SYSTEM, SHALL BE EVIDENCE OF THE FACTS
CONTAINED IN THE CERTIFICATE AND SHALL BE ADMISSIBLE IN A PROCEEDING
ALLEGING A VIOLATION UNDER THIS SECTION WITHOUT THE PRESENCE OR
TESTIMONY OF THE SPEED MONITORING SYSTEM OPERATOR WHO PERFORMED THE
REQUIREMENTS UNDER SUBSECTION (B) OF THIS SECTION.
(2) IF A PERSON WHO RECEIVED A CITATION UNDER SUBSECTION (D) OF
THIS SECTION DESIRES THE SPEED MONITORING SYSTEM OPERATOR TO BE PRESENT
AND TESTIFY AT TRIAL, THE PERSON SHALL NOTIFY THE COURT AND THE STATE IN
WRITING NO LATER THAN 20 DAYS BEFORE TRIAL.
(3) ADJUDICATION OF LIABILITY SHALL BE BASED ON A
PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE.
(F) (1) THE DISTRICT COURT MAY CONSIDER IN DEFENSE OF A VIOLATION:
(I) SUBJECT TO PARAGRAPH (2) OF THIS SUBSECTION, THAT THE
MOTOR VEHICLE OR THE REGISTRATION PLATES OF THE MOTOR VEHICLE WERE
STOLEN BEFORE THE VIOLATION OCCURRED AND WERE NOT UNDER THE CONTROL
OR POSSESSION OF THE OWNER AT THE TIME OF THE VIOLATION;
(II) SUBJECT TO PARAGRAPH (3) OF THIS SUBSECTION, EVIDENCE
THAT THE PERSON NAMED IN THE CITATION WAS NOT OPERATING THE VEHICLE AT
THE TIME OF THE VIOLATION; AND
- 91 -
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
