Benjamin Goldman Law Office Beats Four-Point Following-Too-Closely Ticket From a Three-Car Crash in Batavia City Court

Accident tickets are among the hardest to fight: someone was hit, and the officer writes up the driver in back. Our client received a four-point VTL §1129(a) following-too-closely ticket after a three-vehicle accident on October 21, 2024, and the People also served a CPL §710.30 notice pointing to body-camera footage in which our client allegedly said their foot slipped off the brake. An earlier CPL §30.30 speedy-trial motion had been denied. Our attorney Frederick Peterson, Esq., then requested the officer’s supporting deposition on April 29, 2026 and moved to dismiss once it arrived. In a September 21, 2026 Decision and Order, Hon. Durin B. Rogers of the Batavia City Court held the deposition facially insufficient and granted the motion. The court’s September 23, 2026 dismissal notice confirms the result: ticket dismissed, no points, no fine.

A Rear-End Collision Is Not Proof of Tailgating

VTL §1129(a) prohibits following another vehicle “more closely than is reasonable and prudent, having due regard for the speed of such vehicles and the traffic upon and the condition of the highway.” Once a defendant requests a supporting deposition under CPL §100.25(2), the officer’s deposition must supply facts giving reasonable cause to believe each element was committed. Here it said only that patrol responded to the crash and, based on the drivers’ statements and other evidence, determined our client “failed to leave adequate space and struck the vehicle in front of him.” Judge Rogers found that statement conclusory: it gave no basis for the distance between the vehicles, their speed, traffic conditions, or roadway conditions. The court also held that the CPL §710.30 notice about our client’s alleged statement “cannot fill the voids” of the accusatory instrument. Citing People v Anand, People v Delprete, and People v Bollag, the court dismissed the charge as facially insufficient under CPL §100.40. The court rejected a separate argument that the officer lacked personal knowledge because he did not witness the crash, so the win rests entirely on the thin supporting deposition.

Key Facts (At a Glance)

• Court: Batavia City Court, Genesee County
• Judge: Hon. Durin B. Rogers
• Charge: VTL §1129(a) — following too closely (4 points)
• Date of incident: October 21, 2024 (three-vehicle accident)
• Supporting deposition requested: April 29, 2026 (found timely; the People did not object)
• Prosecution: Genesee County District Attorney’s Office
• Handling attorney: Frederick Peterson, Esq.
• Decision: September 21, 2026 — motion to dismiss for facial insufficiency granted; read the Decision and Order
• Result: Dismissed September 23, 2026 — no points, no fine; read the dismissal notice

Lesson of the Day

When an officer arrives after a crash, the supporting deposition is often the weakest part of the People’s case. A line saying the driver “failed to leave adequate space” restates the charge; it does not describe speed, spacing, traffic, or road conditions. Requesting the supporting deposition, even months into a case, can expose that gap. An alleged admission disclosed in a CPL §710.30 notice does not fix a deficient accusatory instrument.

Benjamin Goldman Law Office

The Benjamin Goldman Law Office defends following-too-closely and accident-related tickets in city, town, and village courts across New York State. This case did not end when the first motion was denied. We went back to the accusatory instrument, requested the officer’s supporting deposition, and challenged what it failed to say. That persistence turned a four-point accident ticket into a dismissal and gave our firm another happy client.

Fight your Ticket CALL NOW FIGHT YOUR TICKET NOW