Lafavor v. State

The evidence supported the defendant's speeding conviction after an officer clocked him traveling 108 miles per hour in a 65 mile per hour speed zone.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Following trial, a jury convicted Daniel Lafavor on one count of speeding. On appeal, Lafavor challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction and further contends that the trial court erred in 1 admitting laser-speed-detection-device evidence despite the State’s failure to comply with the requirements for admission of such evidence, 2 denying his motion for a continuance, 3 admitting exhibits that the State failed to disclose prior to trial, 4 violating his right to confront the witnesses against him, 5 improperly instructing the jury that its verdict could not be governed by sympathy, 6 inadequately responding to questions posed by the jury during its deliberations, and 7 admitting impeachment evidence. For the reasons set forth infra, we affirm.

Viewed in the light most favorable to the jury’s verdict,1 the evidence shows that on the night of July 31, 2011, a Covington police officer was parked alongside Interstate 20 and was monitoring west-bound traffic on a section of the highway where the speed limit was 65 miles per hour. At approximately 9:00 p.m., the officer observed a red Corvette approaching in the first lane and overtaking other vehicles “at a good rate of speed.” Believing that the Corvette was moving much too fast and exceeding the speed limit, the officer trained a laser-speed-detection device on the vehicle and obtained a reading that it was traveling at 108 miles per hour. Consequently, the officer initiated a traffic stop, during which he determined that Lafavor was the driver and owner of the vehicle and that his wife was the only other passenger. The officer then arrested Lafavor, and another officer, whose vehicle was equipped to transport arrestees, transported Lafavor to the county jail.

Lafavor v. State

The evidence supported the defendant's speeding conviction after an officer clocked him traveling 108 miles per hour in a 65 mile per hour speed zone.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report