Ohio Supreme Court Gives Green Light to Traffic Cameras

The Ohio Supreme Court recently upheld a municipality’s ability to utilize automated systems for the enforcement of traffic laws. Mendenhall v. Akron (2008) 117 Ohio St.3d 33. Previously, there was conflict among the courts as to whether the use of automated systems was a proper use of the municipality’s home rule authority, as the State of Ohio had already adopted a criminal system to address the enforcement of traffic laws.

In Mendenhall, the City of Akron instituted an automated system for the enforcement of speed limits in and around school zones. If a vehicle was travelling over the posted speed limit, the system would take a photograph of the vehicle and the vehicle’s license plates. The system would also record the date, time and speed at which the vehicle was traveling. A notice would then be mailed to the registered owner, who would be assessed a civil fine. No criminal charges were brought, no court appearance was required and no points were assessed to the owner’s license. The owner had 21 days in which to appeal the fine to an independent hearing officer appointed by the mayor. Further, in the event that the violation was observed by both the automated system and a police officer, the police officer retained authority to issue the appropriate citations. In these cases, no civil penalties were assessed.

In analyzing the case, the Ohio Supreme Court held that such a system was permissible, provided that it did not alter statewide traffic regulations, such as the speed limits themselves or a police officer’s ability to issue citations for personally observed violations. This decision represents a significant step for municipalities in finding efficient ways to enforce the traffic laws.