Gps used against me

The driver does not have to prove anything.
The burden of proof falls on the prosecution to prove there case beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

Law enforcement may seize the device without a warrant as per above, but I believe a search warrant would be required to access the data on the device unless consent was given by the driver. http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/riley-v-california/

 

I had two occasions in which cops entered the cab uninvited. And it was not like they were asking me for a permission. They just hopped in and felt at home. What can you do, wrestle with them? You can talk of warrants, constitutional rights, how you're going to sue them after and so on, but the fact is that if this is a SOB cop, then practically speaking, he will do everything he feels like with impunity. Once in while they will cross the line, hit you, offend you, I don't know... do whatever bad... and it is witnessed somehow, then you can go after them finding a greedy lawyer to cash in on that, but otherwise only a few would be interested in protecting your rights for the principle.

 

Riley v California is not applicable because there was an arrest made and the phone was searched.

In this case there is no way to substantiate the validity of the data on the device so any ticket based on the data is really moot.

 

In the OP case, consent was given by the driver.

 

Which is why, if it went to court, and the officer said he believed that the driver was in Location D when the logs claimed he was in Location F, the judge would ask the driver, under oath if he was in Location D.

In preparation, they would have asked for fuel and food receipts, mileage records, and all the other data they use, and would see which story the data matches more closely.

And then the driver would have to decide if he could lie under oath about his location, and not get in even worse trouble.

For instance, if he had delivered in the place the GPS claimed he was, they could see if the paperwork had a timestamp, or maybe the guard logged the truck, or they had security cameras, or the goods were scanned by Barcode.
And the GPS would show exactly where he stopped, so it would be easy to figure out where to check for evidence of his presence.

So there are many ways to substantiate the data on the device, and very few to prove it wrong.

And since he would have to go to court to fight the ticket, all this would come out, and the judge would likely side with the officer, since GPS tracks are generally accurate.

 

Actually, since this is a ticket, not a criminal charge, the driver is considered guilty unless they can convince someone that they are not.
If they ask for a jury trial, then it resets it to the case having to be proved by evidence from both sides, but as long as it is just a ticket, no further proof is needed to treat them as guilty. Even if they go to traffic court, you have to present evidence that proves that the officer was in error in citing you, to get the judge to overrule the officers decision.

And since this is also dealing with Fmcsa you have to prove to them that your logs are accurate, and that the officer was wrong, and that the GPS was inaccurate.

 

Anyway, if I cheated and got caught, although the discovery was done unconstitutionally, then I would show the white flag. Otherwise, if I had been off the whole week, someone else was driving the truck (should be super easy to prove or find a credible witness) then no way I would pay anything. No only that, I would raise hell and accuse that cop of incompetence, meaning I'd even spend more money to sue him for my waste of time and costs involved and did all kinds of possible legal complaints and made him remember me. One thing is to get caught on doing something illegal, another is when they screw you for no reason.

 

If you want a trial with a ticket it's a bench trial not a jury trial.

 

And with a traffic court bench trial, the assumption of accuracy is already with the officer, so you have to prove they are wrong, that you are innocent.
Either with contrary evidence, or by showing that their evidence was wrong.
And so the ticket sticks! Lol