316.155
When signal required.
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us
JustiaFla. Statutes
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
316.155 When signal required.—
(1) No person may turn a vehicle from a direct course or move right or left upon a highway unless and until such movement can be made with reasonable safety, and then only after giving an appropriate signal in the manner hereinafter provided, in the event any other vehicle may be affected by the movement.
(2) A signal of intention to turn right or left must be given continuously during not less than the last 100 feet traveled by the vehicle before turning, except that such a signal by hand or arm need not be given continuously by a bicyclist if the hand is needed in the control or operation of the bicycle.
(3) No person may stop or suddenly decrease the speed of a vehicle without first giving an appropriate signal in the manner provided herein to the driver of any vehicle immediately to the rear, when there is opportunity to give such signal.
(4) The signals provided for in s. 316.156 shall be used to indicate an intention to turn, to overtake, or to pass a vehicle and may not, except as provided in s. 316.2397, be flashed on one side only on a parked or disabled vehicle or flashed as a courtesy or “do pass” signal to operators of other vehicles approaching from the rear.
(5) A violation of this section is a noncriminal traffic infraction, punishable as a moving violation as provided in chapter 318.
History.—s. 1, ch. 71-135; s. 16, ch. 76-31; s. 4, ch. 83-68; s. 129, ch. 99-248; s. 4, ch. 2005-164.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 23
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1990–2025 · leading case: State v. Riley
State v. Riley (1994)
“On appeal, the Fifth District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's suppression order, finding that because no other vehicle was affected by the turn, no offense occurred based upon section 316.155, Florida Statutes (1991).”
Frierson v. State (2003)
“The two officers that stopped the vehicle testified that no other vehicle was affected by the driver's right-hand turn onto the highway.”
Hurd v. State (2007)
“(2) A signal of intention to turn right or left must be given continuously during not less than the last 100 feet traveled by the vehicle before turning, except that such a signal by hand or arm need not be given continuously by a bicyclist if the hand is needed in the control…”
Rowe v. State (2001)
“Even if he was briefly outside this margin of error, there is no objective evidence suggesting that Mr.”
Crooks v. State (1998)
“089 is similar to section 316.155, Florida Statutes (1995), governing the use of turn signals, in that a violation does not occur in isolation, but requires evidence that the driver's conduct created a reasonable safety concern.”
Jordan v. State (2002)
“Crooks drove on any of the three occasions, there is no basis to state that he was outside his "practicable" lane. Even if he was briefly outside this margin of error, there is no objective evidence suggesting that Mr.”
Bowling v. State (2001)
“" Although there was discussion and testimony at the suppression hearing as to whether the stop was valid based on a violation of section 316.155(2), failure to give a proper turn signal, the motion and the court's ruling were clearly based on Mr.”
State v. Mae (1998)
“Although the State could have relied on this weak evidence to argue that the stop was a valid traffic stop for violation of section 316.155, Florida Statutes (1995), it chose not to make that argument in the trial court.”
S.A.S. v. State (2004)
“Section 316.155, Florida Statutes (2003), delineates the requirements for using a turn signal: (1) No person may turn a vehicle from a direct course upon a highway unless and until such movement can be made with reasonable safety, and then only after giving an appropriate signal…”
State v. Holland (1996)
“[The defendant's] action was a violation of section 316.155, Florida Statutes (1993).”
State v. Everett (1996)
“Everett’s action was a violation of section 316.155, Florida Statutes (1993).”
United States v. Robinson (2001)
“The defendant in Riley was the passenger in a car that was stopped for failing to use a turn signal pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 316.155 (1999), which provides that: (1) No person may turn a vehicle from a direct course upon a highway unless and until such movement can be made with…”
— 316.155(1) — 3 cases
Frierson v. State (2003)
“The two officers that stopped the vehicle testified that no other vehicle was affected by the driver's right-hand turn onto the highway.”
State v. Riley (1994)
“On appeal, the Fifth District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's suppression order, finding that because no other vehicle was affected by the turn, no offense occurred based upon section 316.155, Florida Statutes (1991).”
State v. Kamins (1993)
— 316.155(2) — 4 cases
Bowling v. State (2001)
“" Although there was discussion and testimony at the suppression hearing as to whether the stop was valid based on a violation of section 316.155(2), failure to give a proper turn signal, the motion and the court's ruling were clearly based on Mr.”
State v. Kamins (1993)
State v. Bonser (1990)
State v. Kamins (1996)
— 316.155(3) — 1 case
Bowling v. State (2001)
“" Although there was discussion and testimony at the suppression hearing as to whether the stop was valid based on a violation of section 316.155(2), failure to give a proper turn signal, the motion and the court's ruling were clearly based on Mr.”
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.