The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)
|
||||||
|
. . . . § 316.155. Finally, Scott’s reliance on United States v. . . .
. . . . § 316.155 (ellipses supplied). . . . .
. . . State, 710 So.2d 1041, 1043 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998) (“Section 316.089 is similar to section 316.155, Florida . . .
. . . have three sources: First, the failure to signal a turn can constitute a traffic offense under section 316.155 . . .
. . . Appellant was stopped for violating sections 316.155 and 316.089, Florida Statutes (2005). . . . Section 316.155 delineates the requirements for using a turn signal: (1) No person may turn a vehicle . . . given continuously by a bicyclist if the hand is needed in the control or operation of the bicycle. § 316.155 . . . However, the Florida Supreme Court has held that section 316.155 requires a signal only if another vehicle . . .
. . . Section 316.155, Florida Statutes (2003), delineates the requirements for using a turn signal: (1) No . . . Failure to signal as required by section 316.155 is a moving violation, thus giving an officer probable . . . The Florida Supreme Court has interpreted section 316.155 to require a signal only when another vehicle . . . State, 710 So.2d 1041, 1043 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998) (comparing section 316.155 with the statute requiring . . . Crooks, 710 So.2d at 1043 (interpreting section 316.155 as requiring “evidence that the driver’s conduct . . .
. . . Under section 316.155(1), Florida Statutes (2000), a person may not turn a vehicle “from a direct course . . . In holding that the stop was improper, the supreme court held that: Section 316.155(1) directs that a . . . the manner hereinafter provided, in the event any other vehicle may be affected by the movement.” § 316.155 . . . Under these circumstances, the driver did not violate section 316.155 and should not have been stopped . . .
. . . Stat. ch. 316.155 (2002)(emphasis added). . . . The Florida Supreme Court has held that § 316.155 is not violated by a failure to signal a turn if the . . .
. . . Section 316.089 is similar to section 316.155, Florida Statutes (1995), governing the use of turn signals . . .
. . . avoid obeying the indicated traffic control indicated by such traffic control device.”) and section 316.155 . . .
. . . . § 316.155 (1999), which provides that: (1) No person may turn a vehicle from a direct course upon a . . . Florida Statute § 316.155 (1999) provides, (1) No person may turn a vehicle from a direct course upon . . .
. . . Bowling’s car that followed a traffic stop for violation of section 316.155(3), Florida Statutes (1999 . . . Bowling, and eventually issued a traffic citation for violating section 316.155(3), which provides: “ . . . testimony at the suppression hearing as to whether the stop was valid based on a violation of section 316.155 . . . Bowling did not violate section 316.155(3) and should not have been stopped by the officer. . . .
. . . Section 316.089 is similar to section 316.155, Florida Statutes (1995), governing the use of turn signals . . .
. . . reliéd on this weak evidence to argue that the stop was a valid traffic stop for violation of section 316.155 . . . pretextual where officer observed defendant make a right-hand turn without signaling in violation of section 316.155 . . . if no other vehicle is affected by a turn from the highway, then a signal is not required by section 316.155 . . .
. . . Everett’s action was a violation of section 316.155, Florida Statutes (1993). . . . We find the state met its burden by showing the stop was authorized because Everett violated section 316.155 . . .
. . . officer because he made two left turns without using a turn signal, which allegedly violated section 316.155 . . .
. . . finding that because no other vehicle was affected by the turn, no offense occurred based upon section 316.155 . . . The district court also cited conflict with Kamins as to the interpretation of section 316.155. . . . The trial court ruled that under section 316.155 a turn signal need only be given in the event another . . . Under these circumstances, the driver did not violate section 316.155 and should not have been stopped . . . Section 316.155, Florida Statutes (1991), which specifies when a signal is required by the operator of . . .
. . . It also appears to be more consistent with the legislative history of the 1983 amendment to section 316.155 . . . : The bill amends § 316.155 to prohibit turning a vehicle or moving right or left upon a roadway unless . . . vehicle was affected by the turn, therefore no offense occurred based upon the provisions of section 316.155 . . . Subsections (1) and (2) of section 316.155, Florida Statutes, should be read in pari materia. . . .
. . . Kamins’ vehicle after Kamins made two left turns without proper turn signals in violation of section 316.155 . . . We do not agree with the trial court that section 316.155(2) must be read in conjunction with section . . . 316.155(1) and that a signal of intention to turn right or left need only be given in the event another . . . Because the police officer observed a violation of section 316.155(2), the police officer acted in accordance . . .
. . . . § 316.155(2), Fla.Stat. (1989). . . .
. . . .-153, 316.154, 316.155, 316.157, 316.158, 316.-159, 316.162, 316.181, 316.182, 316.183, 316.-184, 316.185 . . .