CINCINNATI (AP) — The Ohio Supreme Court plans to hear
arguments in two months on the use of traffic cameras, in a case one
group says could affect every state resident who drives or owns a
vehicle.
Court records show the justices scheduled oral arguments
for June 11 in a motorist’s challenge of a red-light citation in Toledo.
The motorist says the city’s system is bypassing the judiciary and
violating his constitutional due process rights. The state’s highest
court likely will have a decisive say on a growing movement against
camera enforcement that has seen motorists win recent lawsuits in
several other municipalities. The court could deliver its ruling by the
end of this year.
"It’s moving at a good pace," Andrew Mayle, a
Fremont attorney representing driver Bradley Walker in his challenge,
said Tuesday. "We’re ready to go."
Critics of camera enforcement
against speeding and running red lights say the systems are
revenue-raisers that violate basic rights. Cities with cameras contend
that state law allows them to handle such matters administratively. They
also defend cameras as helpful in stretching police resources and
making communities safer.
"I see it as a significant public safety
issue," Toledo law director Adam Loukx said. He said that while drivers
might resent the inconvenience and cost of the citations, he’s more
concerned about preventing death and destruction on the city’s streets.
Nearly
30 Ohio legislators and two civil liberties groups have backed the
camera-use challenge in legal briefs filed with the state Supreme Court.
Among them are sponsors of pending legislation that would ban or
restrict camera enforcement statewide.
Other Ohio cities,
including Cleveland, Columbus and Dayton, that use cameras also have
filed briefs in support of Toledo. The Ohio Municipal League said the
case could potentially affect "every Ohioan who drives or owns a
vehicle." Briefs from the cities contend that Ohio law lets them use
administrative systems for zoning and other issues, and that forcing
them into courts over traffic citations would be costly and clog the
judiciary.
The cities are backed by companies that operate the camera systems in exchange for a portion of the
revenues.
The
Ohio Supreme Court upheld camera use by the city of Akron in a 2008
case, but a flurry of recent lower-court rulings have called camera
enforcement systems unconstitutional.
Judges ordered the southwest
Ohio villages of Elmwood Place and New Miami to shut off the cameras. A
Hamilton County judge compared Elmwood Place’s camera system to a con
man’s card game. Lawyers for motorists in those cases recently sued the
city of Dayton.
Mayle represents a motorist in a case in which
state appellate judges ruled against Cleveland’s camera enforcement
system for handling appeals administratively, but the judges wouldn’t
order refunds for those who paid citations. Mayle and other attorneys
have argued that motorists are afraid not to pay citations because they
could face further costs and marks on their credit scores while
appealing.
Mayle has asked the Supreme Court to resolve
conflicting rulings on the refund issue. He said Tuesday that if the
court decided to combine the Cleveland and Toledo cases, that could
delay the oral arguments.
Meanwhile, Justice Terrence O’Donnell
removed himself from the Toledo case for an unspecified reason. An
appellate judge will fill in on the seven-justice court for the case.
___
Contact the reporter at http://www.twitter.com/dansewell
Copyright 2014 The Associated Press. All rights
reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or
redistributed.