Speeding Ticket

Not sure what you mean when you say you "should 40."

It's unfortunate that you were cited for a speed under the limit of a sign that was in front of you; however, if in the zone in which you were traveling had a lower speed limit, the sign ahead of you does not apply and the officer can cite you for speeding. Also, a rude and condescending officer does not change the issue of speeding, as frustrating as it is. Remember that the officer doesn't know anything about you when he/she's stopping you, and to him/her you're just another person who might be a criminal and the officer is going to treat you like a criminal, even though a speeding ticket is not a crime.

Still, there are several ways to beat a speeding ticket, and rather than focus on the officer's attitude or unfairness of the sign postings, it's important to keep the end goal in mind, which is to get the ticket dismissed.

In order for a court to find that a driver committed a traffic infraction, the judge does not need a video to convict you - or in traffic speak, to find that you committed the infraction. In fact, the State does not need to offer evidence of the tape, if one even really exists (many times officers think they are recording, only to find out that the device did not pick up anything). The discovery rules in traffic infraction cases are very limited. In other words, the State is only obligated to give you a copy of the ticket and the officer's report IF AND ONLY you properly requested a copy; however, the State is not allowed to hinder you in your ability to obtain discovery through other means (such as public records requests). Also, if the State (the prosecutor) has a copy of any evidence it wishes to use against you, you are entitled to a copy of that evidence, but if the State doesn't have it or isn't using it against you, the prosecutor is not the one obligated to send it to you.

The proper remedy for your not being given evidence is suppression of that evidence. In this case it means that the video can't be used against you, but only if you bring the proper motion. But the officer's report is other evidence that can still be used against you as evidence, unless there's another reason to exclude it.

The other issued you raised has to do with continuances and whether 2 continuances are grounds for dismissal. The answer is that it really depends on the circumstances of your case, but if you are requesting a continuance in order to gather exculpatory evidence, and the prosecutor is not withholding evidence that he/she doesn't have, then the continuance counts against you, not the State. If the prosecutor keeps asking for continuances or there is no good reason to continue the case any longer b/c of something the State did or didn't do, then your grounds are stronger. Judges have wide latitude in granting continuances, but the rules governing infractions are very narrow and not all cases should be continued. You are best off consulting with an attorney who does traffic offenses regularly and who understands what's allowed and what's not allowed. Using an attorney will probably save you a lot of headaches, frustration, several trips to court, and very likely increases in your insurance premiums if a judge were to rule against you.