Florida Justices Question Challenge to Red-Light Cameras
The court is set to decide whether Aventura's red-light camera program improperly delegates power by allowing private companies to decide which images to send on to police.
February 07, 2018 at 11:14 AM
3 minute read
Florida Supreme Court justices seemed skeptical Wednesday of a challenge to red-light camera programs in which private companies look over footage and forward potential violations to police.
Luis Torres Jimenez sued the city of Aventura after receiving a traffic citation based on footage reviewed by a third-party vendor. But he does not dispute that he turned right on red, ignoring a sign prohibiting the turn.
“If he violated the statute, I don't see what he has to complain about,” Justice Charles Canady told Jimenez's attorney, Stephen Rosenthal of Podhurst Orseck in Miami.
The case came before the high court after the Third District Court of Appeal ruled the program was constitutional because police officers were reviewing the record before deciding to issue a citation, and not just rubber-stamping the private company's decision.
An earlier Fourth DCA decision found Hollywood's program improperly delegated police power, but the Supreme Court said the cases were distinguishable and did not directly conflict.
Rosenthal argued Aventura's program delegated the power to make a substantive review of the tickets to a private vendor. The company decides about 30 percent to 40 percent of tickets will not go on to the police to be reviewed because the images are unusable or don't meet the standards set by the city for a possible violation, he said.
While those discarded images are available to the police, in a practical sense they can't be reviewed because “the city would be overwhelmed,” Rosenthal said.
Justice Barbara Pariente said every municipality has to make decisions about how to use its manpower — there can't be a police officer sitting at every intersection.
“That means that every day in this state, there are red-light violators that are going undetected in those cities that have no red-light camera because they don't have the manpower to catch everyone. … I'm not getting your standing, even, to assert that they're not putting more people into the violator pile,” Pariente said.
Rosenthal argued any resident would have standing to challenge the red-light camera program because “all cases in the city of Aventura are passed through an unconstitutional filter.” He argued state law preempted the city from delegating “review” powers to a private company.
Florida Solicitor General Amit Agarwal told the court Aventura's rules expressly direct the outside vendor to forward the images to the police if it's “anything even remotely resembling a close call.” Only the police can make a finding of probable cause, he said.
“This is all about the exercise of the state's police power, and that police power as relevant here is the power to issue a citation,” Agarwal said.
Aventura attorney Edward Guedes of Weiss Serota Helfman Cole & Bierman in Coral Gables, who is involved in a number of red-light camera cases, argued the Wandall Act allows for substantive “review” of an image. He said that doesn't just mean looking at the footage for fun.
“There's some level of assessment that has to be conducted as part of a review,” he said.
Louis Arslanian of the Ticket Clinic in Hollywood and Podhurst Orseck associate Lisa Lauck joined Rosenthal at oral arguments.
On the government side, Agarwal and Guedes were joined by Samuel Zeskind of Weiss Serota in Fort Lauderdale and Senior Assistant Attorney General Robert Dietz.
The session was the court's first foray into livestreaming oral arguments on Facebook Live.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllMeta agrees to pay $25 million to settle lawsuit from Trump after Jan. 6 suspension
4 minute readExecutive Assistant, Alleging Pregnancy Discrimination and Retaliation, Sues Florida Healthcare Entrepreneur
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Gunderson Dettmer Opens Atlanta Office With 3 Partners From Morris Manning
- 2Decision of the Day: Court Holds Accident with Post Driver Was 'Bizarre Occurrence,' Dismisses Action Brought Under Labor Law §240
- 3Judge Recommends Disbarment for Attorney Who Plotted to Hack Judge's Email, Phone
- 4Two Wilkinson Stekloff Associates Among Victims of DC Plane Crash
- 5Two More Victims Alleged in New Sean Combs Sex Trafficking Indictment
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250