Breaking news: Andrew Woolley found not guilty of violating CVC 21202(a)

I’ll just quote briefly from the City Attorney’s Response:

The evidence at trial established that at the time of the citation traffic was moving very slowly, creeping along, and that Appellant was riding to the left of the traffic in the number two lane, passing the slow-moving cars. The officer cited Appellant for failing to ride along the right edge of the roadway in violation of Vehicle Code section 21202(a). However, that section applied only to a person operating a bicycle “at a speed less than the normal speed of traffic moving in the same direction at that time (emphasis by City Attorney). At the time of the citation, traffic was creeping along and Appellant was riding at a speed greater than the speed of traffic at that time.
Appellant may have violated other statutes (e.g. Vehicle Code section 22350), but does not appear to have violated Section 21202(a). Accordingly, Respondent concedes the conviction should be reversed.

More analysis will be posted later, along with the actual response.

I am not a lawyer, but I was surprised to see the Deputy City Attorney Steven K. Hansen introduce a speculation that had not been established at the trial (i.e. the possible violation of 22350).

More will be posted after this busy day has passed, including details about Officer Root personally harassing Andrew Woolley long after the trial was completed.