CALCRIM No. 595

<A. Violation of Maximum Speed Law, V eh. Code, § 22349>

[To prove that the defendant committed a violation of the maximum

speed law, the People must prove that:

1. The defendant drove a vehicle on a highway;

AND

2. The defendant drove faster than (65/55/ <insert other

posted speed limit>) mph.

[The term highway describes any area publicly maintained and open to

the public for purposes of vehicular travel and includes a street.]]

<B. Violation of Basic Speed Law, V eh. Code, § 22350>

[To prove that the defendant committed a violation of the basic speed

law, the People must prove that:

1. The defendant drove a vehicle on a highway;

AND

2. The defendant drove (faster than a reasonable person would have

driven considering the weather, visibility, traffic, and conditions

of the highway/ [or] at a speed that endangered the safety of

other people or property).

The speed of travel, alone, does not establish whether a person did or

did not violate the basic speed law. When determining whether the

defendant violated the basic speed law, consider not only the speed, but

also all the surrounding conditions known by the defendant and also

what a reasonable person would have considered a safe rate of travel

given those conditions.

[The term highway describes any area publicly maintained and open to

the public for purposes of vehicular travel and includes a street.]]

<C. Violation of Prima Facie Speed Law, V eh. Code, §§ 22351, 22352>

[To prove that the defendant committed a violation of the prima facie

speed law, the People must prove that:

1. The defendant drove a vehicle on a highway;

2. The defendant drove faster than (15/25) mph;

[AND]

3. The defendant drove <insert appropriate description

from Veh. Code, § 22352 of area where alleged violation

occurred>(;/.)

[AND

4. The defendant’s rate of speed was faster than a reasonable

person would have driven considering the weather, visibility,

traffic, and conditions of the highway.]

[The term highway describes any area publicly maintained and open to

the public for purposes of vehicular travel and includes a street.]

[When determining whether the defendant drove faster than a

reasonable person would have driven, consider not only the speed, but

also all the surrounding conditions known by the defendant and also

what a reasonable person would have considered a safe rate of travel

given those conditions.

The People have the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that

the defendant’s rate of travel was not reasonable given the overall

conditions, even if the rate of travel was faster than the prima facie

speed law. If the People have not met this burden, you must find the

defendant did not violate the prima facie speed law.]]

New January 2006