¶1I dissent. I believe the procedure used in this case is indistinguishable in principle from that defined by statute and held in In re Beamer (1955) 133 Cal.App.2d 63 [283 P.2d 356] to be a speed trap.
46 Cal. App. Supp. 3d 1
People v. Echols
Appellate Division of the Superior Court of California
Decided February 19, 1975
Appellate Division of the Superior Court of California · decided 1975-02-19
Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently July 1979
2 state decisions
Relies on 133 Cal. App. 2d 63 - In Re Beamer
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1975-02-19
View the full empirical analysis of this case →