User Manual

Reference G - Honeycutt v. Commonwealth, Ky., 408 SW2d 421

In this appeal, the court rejects the arguments of the appellant that the evidence should not have

been admitted and again establishes that: 1). A properly constructed and operated radar device is

capable of accurately measuring the speed of a motor vehicle; 2). The tuning fork test is an

accurate method of determining the accuracy of a radar unit; 3). It is sufficient to qualify an

operator who has knowledge and training which enables him to properly set up, test, and read the

radar; 4). It is not required that the operator understand the scientific principles of radar or be

able to explain its internal workings, and that a few hours of instruction normally should be

enough to qualify an operator; 5). The officer's estimate of excessive speed from visual

observation, when confirmed by the reading of the radar device and when the offending vehicle is

out front, by itself, nearest the radar, is sufficient to identify the vehicle if the observations

support the radar evidence.

From the case law, the officer needs to know and to be able to testify to the following

points to have a successful prosecution:

1. The officer must establish the time, place, and location of the radar device; the

location of the offending vehicle when the offence took place; that the defendant

was driving the vehicle; and that State law regarding the posting of speed limits

and radar signs had been complied with.

2. The officer must state his qualifications and training.

3. The officer must establish that the radar device was operating normally.

4. The officer must establish that the radar was tested for accuracy, both before and

after its use, using a certified tuning fork or other accepted method.

5. The officer must accurately identify the vehicle.

6. The officer must have seen that the vehicle appeared to be speeding and

estimated how fast.

7. The officer must have gotten a radar speed-reading that agreed with the visual

estimate of the target vehicle's speed.

8. If a Doppler audio feature is present on the radar device, the officer is strongly

encouraged to establish that the audio Doppler pitch correlated with both the

visual speed estimate and the radar reading.

9. If moving radar is used, the officer must testify that the patrol speed indicated by

the radar was verified against the speedometer at the time the speed measurement

was obtained.

This information is drawn from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's Basic

Training Program in RADAR Speed Measurement. We also recommend you read our legal

publication, Legal Basis for the Use of Police Radar for additional information.