SANTA CRUZ, Calif. -- A Santa Cruz Superior Court judge has ruled that California's motorcycle helmet law is "unconstitutional" and "vague."

The case involves self-described outlaw Richard Quigley, who's been fighting the motorcycle helmet law since it fist took effect 15 years ago.

Quigley chooses to wear a beanie personally stiched with a Department of Transportation insignia and claims it meets the legal definition of a helmet. Apparently, a judge agrees.

"So far, it's been a long, hard battle, but like I said, I got that taste of victory in my mouth now. It's a whole different battle since when it started," Quigley said.

In his eight-page ruling, Judge Michael Barton ruled that at least a dozen citations leveled against Quigley for not wearing a motorcycle helmet are unconstitutional because the California Highway Patrol has failed to properly define what constitutes a safe motorcycle helmet.

"Anything's a helmet; I mean, a Dixie cup on a shoe string. I mean, there's no physical description of a helmet whatsoever. The only thing that the California law requires is that it has the letters DOT," Quigley said.

At the Harley-Davidson motorcyle shop in Santa Cruz, the store's sales manager, Chance Toigo, said that while his customers have mixed feelings about wearing helmets, he advocates the safety of wearing one.

"I totally agree that people have a choice to choose themselves. It's their life, it's their family and they should have that decision on what their heart tells them to do," Toigo said.

The CHP issued 672 helmet law citations to motorcycle drivers and another 67 to passengers in 2005.

The agency has declined to comment on the judge's ruling until it receives legal advice from the state attorney general's office.