The judgment is reversed and the charges are dismissed in the interests of justice. (People v. Kriss (1979) 96 Cal.App.3d 913.) As the People concede, the trial court erred in interpreting Vehicle Code section 21202 as requiring Appellant to ride his bicycle to the right of traffic under the conditions presented here.
It’s interesting to note that the appellate judges did not rule on lack of evidence that my speed was less than the normal speed of traffic (the City Attorney’s concession), but instead said that the trial court “erred in interpreting” the CVC 21202. I think they must have agreed on more points than just the speed argument!
I still haven’t been refunded my $165 fine. Hopefully I’ll get it in less than 15 months.