San Diegan Cyclists and California’s Vehicle Code 21202 (a)
Posted By Sam Ollinger on December 8, 2009
California’s Vehicle Code 21202 (a) states:
CVC 21202. Image from Njord Noatun
21202. (a)Any person operating a bicycle upon a roadway at a speed less than the normal speed of traffic moving in the same direction at that time shall ride as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway except under any of the following situations:
(1) When overtaking and passing another bicycle or vehicle proceeding in the same direction.
(2) When preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into a private road or driveway.
(3) When reasonably necessary to avoid conditions (including, but not limited to, fixed or moving objects, vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians, animals, surface hazards, or substandard width lanes) that make it unsafe to continue along the right-hand curb or edge, subject to the provisions of Section 21656. For purposes of this section, a “substandard width lane” is a lane that is too narrow for a bicycle and a vehicle to travel safely side by side within the lane.
(4) When approaching a place where a right turn is authorized.
Amended Sec. 4, Ch. 674, Stats. 1996. Effective January 1, 1997.
———
San Diego cyclist, Andrew Wooley was cited for violating CVC 21202(a) on March 6th, 2009. Woolley’s citation was for failing to ride on the right-hand side of the road. At his hearing a few months ago in August, Woolley showed how the two exceptions to the vehicle code applied to him in this particular instance. The Judge agreed with Woolley and yet ruled that cyclists were required to ride on the curb line.
Woolley sent us a copy of his transcript [pdf] recently. He is currently appealing the ruling. We will keep you posted on what happens.
When I contacted District Council member Todd Gloria about this issue several months ago, his office responded stating the following:
Councilmember Gloria is aware of this issue and has been in touch with members of the cycling community, the San Diego Police Department, and the City Attorney’s office about it. The last we heard was the City Attorney’s office was working with SDPD to ensure that officers do not wrongly ticket cyclists. This was at the end of June. Has there been any further incidents of citations since the end of June? If so, I would be happy to follow up.
I have not heard about other citations issued regarding real or apparent violations of CVC 21202.
Meanwhile, BikeSD will keep on top of this case with Woolley and continue to keep you updated.
Question: so if there is NO traffic moving in the same direction, don’t we have the right to the full use of the lane?
[...] Ridazz — to join them for the Lincoln Heights Christmas Parade this weekend. A San Diego cyclist gets a ticket for observing CVC21202. Missouri’s Tracy Wilkins is in awe of the Fat Cyclist; evidently, Johan [...]
Wow, just read the transcript, this is inconcievable (well not really, anti-cycling/pro-motoring bias is readily apperant in this court and in public in general).
Mr. Wooley did a good job presenting his case, however, the way these court cases often go the judge rarely disagrees with the officer. Even when the facts are obvious. Anyone who rides regularly (and vehiculary) often wonders if they will be cited in such an egregious manner.
The only stronger case I think may have helped would be to cite that lane position is fluid and constantly changing on conditions. However the asking by the court of posted speed is irrelevant. More bias.
Mr. Wooley should contact the Bicycle Coalition and CABO as it exemplifies the need to modify current law and educate enforcement officers.
I have contacted SDCBC, and Jim Baross has submitted all of the case information to CABO. Kathy Keehan has been working to get an attorney to help with the next step in this process. Unfortunately, I was convinced that the case was so cut & dry that no judge in their right mind could find me guilty, as long as the officer didn’t make up some crazy scenario. The officer was truthful, and still I was found Guilty. If I had brought in the big guns (bicycle safety experts, licensed instructors, etc) to testify at the traffic court the Judge may have found differently. But then we wouldn’t get to appeal. So there’s always a silver lining, right?
[...] I included a link to the excellent Bike San Diego website, for a story about a cyclist who was ticketed for passing a short row of stopped vehicles on the left, even though that is not prohibited under California [...]
It looks like the law is not crystal clear here so I am going to have to agree with the officer and the judge on this one. The cyclist was not taking the lane, he was splitting lanes. Riding down the middle like that was so unsafe. He left himself open to lane changes from both sides, not to mention what happens when traffic picked up speed again. The right side was safer since you knew where the right turns could happen, unlike random lane changes.
On a different note, the cyclist did himself no favors by lecturing the judge on what the law is. Arguing at the end like that was just the final nails on the coffin.
@MTS: There is nothing unclear about the law. Please provide a reference from an accredited bicycle safety manual which explains that passing on the left is more dangerous. There is a big difference between what some people think is safe (the policeman, the judge, you) and what is actually safe (passing slow moving vehicles on the left). Passing through an intersection to the left of right-turning vehilces results in zero potential collision points. Trying to cut between a queue of moving, turning vehilcles results in at least two potential collision points that I can think of (the car turning, and any cars passing around that car).
In California there is no law against lane splitting. It is legal.
A judge who doesn’t pay attention to what the law actually says deserves a lot more than a “lecture.”
The law says you need to stay as far to the right as is practible. I find nothing in the transcript from you showing why you could not stay on the shoulder or take the right lane. Cars make right turns all the time so why was this stretch of road different than any other? You failed to demonstrate that to the judge. Even if you had, you then needed to show why merely taking the right lane, which would be the right-most position if the shoulder was unsafe, was inadequate, making lane splitting your only safe option.
BTW, I never said lane-splitting was illegal. The point I was trying to get across was that it was a dumb choice.
We should probably just all ride on the sidewalk, or for that matter just walk our bikes on the sidewalk. That would be the safest thing, right?
What exactly does the law say again? Please be specific. Quote the law in full if you’d like. Wait a sec, It’s written for us at the beginning of this post! Please read it again and see if you still think I was wrong. Then read the post that details how the City Attorney agrees that I wasn’t breaking the law. Then please appologize.
(only one “p” in “apologize”, sorry)
Actually, I’d like to apologize for being combative. That is clearly no way to positively influence discussions. I would be happy to discuss this with anyone who doesn’t understand why what I did was not only legal, but the safer (in my opinion safest) option on that road at that time. Sorry again for being hot-headed in my response.
@MTS, CVC 21202 is crystal clear in explicitly stating that the cyclist must ride far to the right only when he’s traveling slower than the other traffic moving in the same direction at the same time as him. Woolley was clearly moving faster than the other traffic, and Officer Root was incorrect in issuing his citation.
The Appellate Court agreed with Woolley and found in his favor.
To be perfectly clear, the Appellate Division of the San Diego Superior Court has not yet issued their decision. The City Attorney (the prosecution) has recommended the court overturn the original decision. So it’s pretty much assured that the decision will be overturned, but it hasn’t happened yet.
[...] to the recent item about Andrew Wooley, the San Diego cyclist wrongly convicted of violating CVC21202 for passing a short line of cars in the right turn lane on the left, even [...]