New Red Light Camera Photo Defense
Posted on Feb 17, 2026 9:01am PST
Explained by California Criminal Attorney for Santa Rosa, Napa, San Rafael,
Lakeport, Ukiah, and Eureka
In a recent case, People v. Rekte, the Fourth District Court of Appeals
on January 8, 2015, issued an order confirming that expert testimony can
successfully rebut the presumption accuracy of the red light computer-camera
photo and print-out. In this particular case, the photographic evidence
contained a computerized stamp indicating that the yellow light interval
was 3.6 seconds which complied with the California state requirements.
Mr. Rekte retained a defense expert who testified that the print-out was
inaccurate and the interval was actually 3.5 seconds which does not comply
with California state requirements. The Court further found that when
the defendant’s expert testimony successfully rebutted the presumption
of reliability, the burden then shifted to the district attorney to prove
the reliability of the photo and the length of the yellow light interval.
The prosecution, however, provided no further independent or expert evidence
and, as such, did not carry its burden of proof. The conviction was reversed.
This is a clear example of how a criminal defense lawyer in Santa Rosa,
Napa, San Rafael, Lakeport, Ukiah, and Eureka can construct a defense
by understanding the different burdens of proof and rebuttable presumptions
in a criminal case.
For more information regarding criminal defense attorneys in Santa Rosa,
Napa, San Rafael, Lakeport, Ukiah, and Eureka, see
www.dinanlaw.com.