A judge in Sanford ruled Tuesday that a Lake Mary man was lawfully exercising his First Amendment rights when he flashed his headlights to warn neighbors that a deputy had set up a speed trap nearby.
That decision is another victory for Ryan Kintner, 25, who sued the Seminole County Sheriff’s Office last year, accusing it of misconstruing a state law and violating his civil rights, principally his right to free speech.
He was ticketed Aug. 10 by a Seminole County deputy, but Kintner alleges the officer misapplied a state law designed to ban motorists from flashing after-market emergency lights.
Circuit Judge Alan Dickey earlier ruled that that state law does not apply to people who did what Kintner did, use his headlights to communicate.
On Tuesday the judge went a step further, saying people who flash their headlights to communicate are engaging in behavior protected by the U.S. Constitution.
“He felt the police specifically went out of their way to silence Mr. Kintner and that it was clearly a violation of his First Amendment free speech rights,” said his attorney, J. Marcus Jones of Oviedo.
Jones has filed a similar but much broader suit in Tallahassee against the Florida Highway Patrol.
A hearing in that case is scheduled next month.
“This stuff is fun,” Jones said after Tuesday’s hearing.
Each suit asked that police agencies be ordered to halt writing those tickets. The highway patrol stopped voluntarily, awaiting the outcome of the suit. So have the Seminole County Sheriff’s Office and other agencies.
In addition to Kintner’s civil suit against the sheriff’s office, he also is fighting the ticket. It is still pending in county court in Sanford.
The officer also ticketed him for running a stop sign, saying Kintner had pulled beyond a stop bar before coming to a complete halt.
Join the official YWN WhatsApp status
8 Responses
This is pretty clear; it’s a form of speech, so it’s protected by the first amendment. The state can regulate the manner of speech, in a content-neutral way, but only in ways that don’t suppress the message, and only if there is a compelling government interest that can’t be satisfied any other way. That doesn’t apply here.
The compelling government interest is to take your money and give you tickets.
I once got a ticket for it and the violation code was for faulty equipment since it isn’t normal for a car to have its lights flashing. The judge agreed with the cops assertion.
Since the ruling was under the Federal, rather than the state, constitution the prosecution can appeal eventually to the Federal Supreme Court which may not be as sympathetic.
Was this in state court or in fed court?
Total hypocrisy, if someone were to have their lights off at night or have their brights on you can “flash” them to make them aware of their situation- thereby preventing a potential accident . If you are following someone you can legally flash them (politely) to communicate that you’d like them to move over so you can pass (this method is listed in many state’s driver’s education handbooks). A cop knows this and was probably not having a good day. That and the driver’s attitude add up to either getting a ticket or a warning. Just the fact that this guy is pursuing a lawsuit over a dumb ticket says to me this isn’t his only altercation with the law.
Obstructing Governmental Administration
#6, it’s not a “dumb ticket”, it’s a civil rights violation.
#7 the first amendment trumps that.