Ron asked: Two touring cyclists were rear-ended and killed in Darien, Georgia over the weekend:

http://www.news-journalonline.com/news/local/west-volusia/2012/04/28/2-osteen-cyclists-killed-in-georgia.html

Last year I we all lost a great friend when he was rear-ended and killed on SR11 north of DeLand:

http://www.news-journalonline.com/breakingnews/2011/08/bicyclist-killed-in-collision-with-van.html

My question is this: is information regarding the outcome of investigations into such tragedies a matter of public record and available to anyone interested?

Attempts I have made into the DeLand accident received no response form FHP.

Answer

This is the link to the information about obtaining crash reports.

http://www.flhsmv.gov/fhp/misc/CrashReport/

David asked: If a police officer decides to enforce a non-existent law or a misinterpretation of an existing law (e.g., a police office tickets me for not cycling in the bike lane even though I’m overtaking another cyclist in the lane) what recourse do I have?

Answer

Let’s assume you are riding alone or single file, and otherwise obeying all laws, leaving the bike lane, passing and returning to the bike lane in a timely manner.  The applicable statute is shown at this post:

http://flbikelaw.org/2011/04/bike-lanes-2/

You have a number of options.

If the opportunity presents itself, and if you are carrying a Law Enforcement Guide to Bicycling Laws produced by the Florida Bicycle Association, you can ask the officer to review the applicable section.

You can ask to speak to a supervisor while on scene to explain your case.

You can pay the fine and end it there.

You can wait and attend traffic court and explain your case.

You can retain counsel to explain the circumstances to the judge.

You can retain counsel and file a motion to dismiss before the court date.

The latter option is recommended.  Traffic courts are hurried and chaotic, and you cannot be assured of a full hearing and opportunity to fully explain the laws and circumstances.  Decisions are inconsistent in different jurisdictions.  See this post:

http://flbikelaw.org/2010/03/two-citations-identical-circumstances-opposite-verdicts/

If the facts and statutes are laid out in advance in an office setting instead, there is ample time to receive a full review.   You also have the written evidence to use in an appeal if the decision is not favorable.

You can also write to the Mayor, Chief of Police, Sheriff, County or Municipality Commissions to bring the situation to their attention and ask for further education of the officer and others.

For the best results long-term, you can also attend your local Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Committee meetings to advocate for cyclists rights, or organize a joint cyclists/law enforcement effort to attain uniform compliance and enforcement in your community.  This is one example of such a successful effort in Palm Beach County.

http://flbikelaw.org/2010/01/riderightdrive-right-campaign/

Luiz asked:  Can a bicyclist receive a ticket for crash?  Does the bicyclist have to have (and provide) liability insurance information when involved in an accident?

What if he did crash, in the rear, but the aftermath is a head concussion with memory loss? How it can be defended?

Can a bicyclist with an impeccable driving record have his driver’s license suspended for a bicycle accident?

Answer

We do not provide legal advice at this site. You should retain counsel to prepare a defense.  With regard to your other questions, the following statutes apply.

Bicyclists must comply with traffic law as must other drivers. Police officers enforce the traffic laws and issue Uniform Traffic Citations to motorists, bicyclists and pedestrians when appropriate.  That authority is defined in FS 316.640.

s. 316.640 – Enforcement

The enforcement of the traffic laws of this state is vested as follows ….

(The statute defines the jurisdictions and authority of various police officers.)

Bicyclists are not required to possess proof of financial responsibility or insurance.  That is a requirement to own and operate a motor vehicle.  A bicycle is not a motor vehicle.

s. 324.011 - Purpose of Chapter

It is the intent of this chapter to recognize the existing privilege to own or operate a motor vehicle on the public streets and highways of this state when such vehicles are used with due consideration for others and their property, and to promote safety and provide financial security requirements for such owners or operators whose responsibility it is to recompense others for injury to person or property caused by the operation of a motor vehicle. Therefore, it is required herein that the operator of a motor vehicle involved in a crash or convicted of certain traffic offenses meeting the operative provisions of s. 324.051(2) shall respond for such damages and show proof of financial ability to respond for damages in future accidents as a requisite to his or her future exercise of such privileges.

Driver’s of motor vehicles are required to possess a valid drivers’ license.  Again, bicyclists are not operating motor vehicles, and are not required to have a drivers’ license.

s. 322.03 - Drivers Must be Licensed; Penalties

(1)  Except as otherwise authorized in this chapter, a person may not drive any motor vehicle upon a highway in this state unless such person has a valid driver’s license issued under this chapter.

(2) …. prior to issuing the driver’s license the department shall require such person to present proof of financial responsibility ….

A driver of a motor vehicle may lose a driver’s license due to an accumulation of points toward that license.  Since a drivers’ license is not required to operate a bicycle, points may not be awarded for traffic violations of the cyclist.  Please see this previous post that addresses that question.

http://flbikelaw.org/wp-admin/post.php?action=edit&post=146

It was similar to another citation about a year ago in another jurisdiction.  Both cases were nearly identical in the circumstances and the evidence presented by the bicyclists to the court.

The cases are notable because one cyclist was found guilty and the other the case was dismissed.  There were some differences in the situations.

Both cyclists were advised to write to the department, retain counsel, and file a motion to dismiss before the court date.  The cyclist who was found guilty chose to proceed without counsel.

The other retained counsel and filed a motion to dismiss, which was decided in his favor before the court date.

I believe that the time and proper setting of a pre-trial motion will enable full exploration of the circumstances, facilitating a better decision.   The environment in traffic court is not conducive to thorough examination of the laws and circumstances of a case.

In the upheld case, there was an allegation of rude and disrespectful conduct on the part of the cyclist. Although the cyclist denies such behavior, my uninformed opinion is that those allegations affected both the decision to award the citation and the court case. We should know that is not a positive way to impress an officer or the court, and should never be a part of our roadway interactions.

There were some minor differences in the circumstances.  One was a multi-lane roadway and the other was a roadway with one lane in each direction, which should have no bearing.  Both lanes were less than 12 feet wide.   Both met the substandard-width lane, unsafe condition exception to the “keep right” provisions of FS 316.2065 (5)(a)3.

Some of the statements allegedly made by officers in both cases stress the need for education about the laws.  The statements were reported by the cyclists and I have no way of verifying some of them. My guess is that they were accurate since I have heard other such reports that I know to be true.

In both cases, the officer indicated that the cyclist could not impede traffic.  The statute that generally addresses impeding traffic applies only to motor vehicles.  (In each of these cases, the cyclist was riding alone.  There is another statute that discusses impeding traffic while riding two abreast.  Please see the July 13, 2009 post in the archives.)

s. 316.183 – Unlawful Speed

(5) No person shall drive a motor vehicle at such a slow speed as to impede or block the normal and reasonable movement of traffic

In the case in which the cyclist was found guilty, the officer indicated in court that there was a sidewalk that the cyclist could have been using, indicating ignorance of the rights of cyclists as operators of vehicles and the additional hazards of cyclists riding on sidewalks.

The cyclist read the substandard-width provision in the statutes, and a quote from the Department of Transportation about a wide curb lane being a minimum of 14 feet wide with narrower lanes being not wide enough for a motor vehicle to safely pass a bicycle within the same lane.

The officer stated that virtually all lanes in that city are less than 14 feet wide and cyclists would be able to ride in the center of the lane everywhere, which seems to imply that since that community has narrow roadways, Florida law does not apply.

About 90% (My estimate) of Florida roadways have lanes that are less than 14 feet wide.  I believe that was the intent of the “unsafe conditions” language in the Bicycle Regulations that allows a cyclist to leave the right side of the roadway and become more visible, thereby encouraging safe and legal overtaking and passing by motorists.

The statutes reflect and should encourage safe cycling practices.  In both cases, there is a lack of understanding of the principles of safe cycling, and that riding far right in a narrow lane encourages motorists to illegally and dangerously attempt to pass within the lane with oncoming traffic or conflicting traffic in the adjacent lane.

It is troubling that such similar cases could be decided so differently.  That does not bode well for education and enforcement of the laws about bicycling.

This is the second such case in that community that has resulted in a guilty verdict.  In neither case did the judge state how narrow a lane must be to be substandard-width, and therefore entitled to treatment as an unsafe condition under that provision of FS 316.2065, nor recognize cyclists’ discretion to do as the statutes say, avoid unsafe conditions.

Florida is among those states with the very highest casualties and some communities, including that with the upheld citations, have been repeatedly identified as those with “Mean Streets” in 2004 and more recently, “Dangerous By Design”.  We know from studying crash reports that a significant numbers of crashes result from cyclists riding too far right when they are not required to do so by law.  Cyclists need law enforcement and the courts to support their legal right to protect themselves from common crashes.

If the image of Florida as having the most dangerous communities in the U.S. is to change, we must begin by concern for safety over traffic flow.

The uniform understanding and application of the laws about bicycling in Florida will come from implementation of FBA’s Bicycle Law Enforcement Program.

RC asked:  Can conviction of a moving violation by a bicyclist result in points on that person’s driver’s license?

Answer:

No.  The point system for violations of motor vehicle laws and ordinances, and also all violations of FS 316.2065 – Bicycle Regulations, does not apply to violations by a bicyclist.

FS 322.27 – Authority of Department to Suspend or Revoke License

(1)  Notwithstanding any provisions to the contrary in chapter 120, the department is hereby authorized to suspend the license ….

(3)  There is established a point system for evaluation of convictions of violations of motor vehicle laws or ordinances ….

7.  … However, no points shall be imposed for violation of … s. 316.2065.

(i)  This subsection shall not apply to persons operating a non-motorized vehicle for which a driver’s license is not required.