Ariz. Rev. Stat. » Title 28
Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 28-694 (2026)

Wrong-way driving; civil penalty; traffic survival school; definition

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section AZ-LEGazleg.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

28-694. Wrong-way driving; civil penalty; traffic survival school; definition

A. A person who drives the wrong way on a controlled access highway commits wrong-way driving.

B. A person who is found responsible for a violation of this section is subject to a civil penalty of five hundred dollars.

C. A person who is found responsible for a violation of this section shall attend and successfully complete approved traffic survival school educational sessions that are designed to improve the safety and habits of drivers.

D. For the purposes of this section, "wrong way" means vehicular movement that is in a direction opposing the legal flow of traffic.  Wrong way does not include median crossing or a collision where a motor vehicle comes to a stop facing the wrong way.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 26 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1990–2025 · leading case: State v. Nichols, 819 P.2d 995 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1991).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Nichols, 819 P.2d 995 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 20× “The superior court concluded that the DUI proceeding subjected Layne to double jeopardy in light of the prior suspension of his license under A.R.S. § 28-694. Because this is a matter of statewide importance, relating to legal as opposed to factual issues, University of Arizona…”
State Ex Rel. Ross v. Nance, 798 P.2d 1295 (Ariz. 1990). · cites it 31× “Pursuant to A.R.S. § 28-694, the arresting officer served respondent with an order of suspension of driving privileges.”
Medina v. Arizona Dep't of Transp., 916 P.2d 1130 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 23× “Medina timely requested a hearing with ADOT regarding his license suspension pursuant to A.R.S. § 28-694. The ADOT hearing officer affirmed Medina's ninety-day license suspension following the hearing.”
Knapp v. Miller, 799 P.2d 868 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 25× “Knapp (“Knapp”) appeals from a judgment affirming an administrative order suspending Knapp’s driver’s license pursuant to A.R.S. § 28-694. We affirm the judgment. I.”
State v. Mendoza, 823 P.2d 51 (Ariz. 1992). · cites it 8× “First, Hinson's primary goal of quickly removing drunk drivers from our streets is now accomplished by the "Administrative Per Se law," A.R.S. § 28-694, and the Implied Consent Statute, A.”
Marzolf v. Superior Court, 912 P.2d 1373 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 13× “AN ADMINISTRATIVE LICENSE SUSPENSION UNDER § 28-694 AND A DUI CONVICTION UNDER §28-692(A)(1) ARE NOT BASED ON THE “SAME OFFENSE” SO THAT DOUBLE JEOPARDY DOES NOT BAR A SECOND PUNISHMENT OR PROSECUTION The next question is whether the second proceeding is based on the “same…”
Werner v. Prins, 812 P.2d 1089 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 19× “The issue in this case is whether the state violated appellee James Werner’s right to due process of the law when it was unable to provide him a reasonably reliable preserved breath sample for use in a civil driver’s license suspension hearing held pursuant to A.R.S. § 28-694. 1…”
Wieseler v. Prins, 805 P.2d 1044 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 7× “section 28-694 alleging that the petitioner had submitted to a breath test which indicated a blood alcohol content in excess of .”
Wicks v. Motor Veh. Div., 908 P.2d 1092 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 18× “Although the court’s order imposed a period of limited driving identical to the sixty days of restricted driving required by the MVD § 28-694 suspension, the parties agree, and the court’s minute entry makes clear, that the court did not intend that the restriction it imposed…”
State v. Martin, 847 P.2d 619 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 2× “section 28-694. After a hearing, the hearing officer ordered defendant’s license suspended.”
Bucciarelli v. Arizona Dep't of Transp., 800 P.2d 54 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 10× “146 percent blood-alcohol content and ADOT promptly suspended his driver’s license pursuant to A.R.S. § 28-694. PROCEDURAL HISTORY Following the suspension of Bucciarelli’s driver’s license, Bucciarelli was asked to choose between summary review and a full hearing.”
State v. Cabrera, 44 P.3d 174 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 2× “2d 51, 57 (1992)(referring to A.R.S. § 28-694, later A.R.S. § 28-1385).”
Show all 26 citing cases →
Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 28-694(A): 8 cases
State Ex Rel. Ross v. Nance, 798 P.2d 1295 (Ariz. 1990). “Pursuant to A.R.S. § 28-694, the arresting officer served respondent with an order of suspension of driving privileges.”
Wieseler v. Prins, 805 P.2d 1044 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1990). “section 28-694 alleging that the petitioner had submitted to a breath test which indicated a blood alcohol content in excess of .”
Miernicki v. Arizona Dep't of Transp., 905 P.2d 551 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1995).
Lara v. Tanaka, 924 P.2d 192 (Haw. 1996).
Bucciarelli v. Arizona Dep't of Transp., 800 P.2d 54 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1990). “146 percent blood-alcohol content and ADOT promptly suspended his driver’s license pursuant to A.R.S. § 28-694. PROCEDURAL HISTORY Following the suspension of Bucciarelli’s driver’s license, Bucciarelli was asked to choose between summary review and a full hearing.”
Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 28-694(B): 3 cases
Edwards v. Arizona Dept. of Transp., 859 P.2d 760 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1993).
Edwards v. Arizona Dep't of Transp./Motor Veh. Div., 859 P.2d 760 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1993).
Diaz v. Arizona Dep't of Transp., 918 P.2d 1077 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1996).
Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 28-694(D): 1 case
Franz v. State (Ariz. Ct. App. 2025).
Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 28-694(E): 5 cases
Wieseler v. Prins, 805 P.2d 1044 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1990). “section 28-694 alleging that the petitioner had submitted to a breath test which indicated a blood alcohol content in excess of .”
Bierner v. State, Taxation & Revenue Dep't, 831 P.2d 995 (N.M. Ct. App. 1992).
Bucciarelli v. Arizona Dep't of Transp., 800 P.2d 54 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1990). “146 percent blood-alcohol content and ADOT promptly suspended his driver’s license pursuant to A.R.S. § 28-694. PROCEDURAL HISTORY Following the suspension of Bucciarelli’s driver’s license, Bucciarelli was asked to choose between summary review and a full hearing.”
Miernicki v. Arizona Dep't of Transp., 905 P.2d 551 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1995).
Isbell v. Miller, 797 P.2d 738 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1990).
Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 28-694(F): 1 case
Bucciarelli v. Arizona Dep't of Transp., 800 P.2d 54 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1990). “146 percent blood-alcohol content and ADOT promptly suspended his driver’s license pursuant to A.R.S. § 28-694. PROCEDURAL HISTORY Following the suspension of Bucciarelli’s driver’s license, Bucciarelli was asked to choose between summary review and a full hearing.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.