O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 40-8-26 (2019)

Standards for brake lights and signal devices

✓ O.C.G.A. — 2019 edition (Public.Resource.Org Release 73)

Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section GA-LEGlegis.ga.gov (official) JustiaJustia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Any motor vehicle may be equipped and when required under this article shall be equipped with the following signal lights or devices: (1) A brake light on the rear which shall emit a red light and which shall be actuated upon application of the service (foot) brake and which may but need not be incorporated with a taillight; and (2) A light or lights or mechanical signal device capable of clearly indicating any intention to turn either to the right or to the left and which shall be visible from both the front and the rear. (b) Every brake light shall be plainly visible and understandable from a distance of 300 feet to the rear both during normal sunlight and at nighttime, and every signal light or lights indicating intention to turn shall be visible and understandable during daytime and nighttime from a distance of 300 feet from both the front and the rear. When a vehicle is equipped with a brake light or other signal lights, such light or lights shall at all times be maintained in good working condition. No brake light or signal light shall project a glaring or dazzling light. (c) All mechanical signal devices shall be self-illuminated when in use at the times mentioned in Code Section 40-8-20.

(d) All lenses on brake lights and signal devices shall be maintained in good repair and shall meet manufacturers’ specifications.

History

(Ga. L. 1953, Nov.-Dec. Sess., p. 556, § 112; Code 1933, § 68E-207, enacted by Ga. L. 1982, p. 165, § 4; Code 1981, § 40-8-26, enacted by Ga. L. 1982, p. 165, § 10.)

Annotations

Code Commission notes. - Pursuant to Code Section 28-9-5, in 1991, ‘‘taillight’’

was substituted for ‘‘tail light’’ in paragraph (a)(1).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS No conflict with § 40-6-124(b). - There is no conflict between O.C.G.A. § 40-8-26, which requires the maintenance in good order of signal devices on all motor vehicles, and O.C.G.A. § 40-6-124(b), which excuses from that requirement vehicles of a certain size. Stubbs v. State, 193 Ga. App. 342, 387 S.E.2d 619 (1989). Violation provided probable cause for investigatory stop. - Officer’s observation of a three-inch crack in the taillight and a hole in the lens of the defendant’s car provided the officer with a

valid basis for an investigatory stop. Loveless v. State, 337 Ga. App. 894, 789 S.E.2d 244 (2016). Punishment for violation. - Fine of $1,000 for a brake light violation was not excessive. Bowen v. State, 237 Ga. App. 597, 516 S.E.2d 311 (1999). Cited in Williams v. Herr, 112 Ga. App. 529, 145 S.E.2d 639 (1965); Shirey v. Woods, 118 Ga. App. 851, 165 S.E.2d 891 (1968); State v. Warren, 242 Ga. App. 605, 530 S.E.2d 515 (2000); Lancaster v. State, 261 Ga. App. 348, 582 S.E.2d 513 (2003).

RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. - 7A Am. Jur. 2d, Automobiles and Highway Traffic, § 201. C.J.S. - 60 C.J.S., Motor Vehicles, § 43 et seq. 60A C.J.S., Motor Vehicles, § 630 et seq.

ALR. - Reciprocal duties of drivers of automobiles or other vehicles proceeding in the same direction, 24 A.L.R. 507; 47 A.L.R. 703; 62 A.L.R. 970; 104 A.L.R. 485.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 7 cases, 1989–2019 · leading case: United States v. Erickson Meko Campbell, 912 F.3d 1340 (11th Cir. 2019).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

United States v. Erickson Meko Campbell, 912 F.3d 1340 (11th Cir. 2019). · cites it 4× “All that O.C.G.A. § 40-8-26 requires is that the turn signal "indicate a driver's intention to change lanes," and the Maxima's left turn signal was able to do that.”

Lancaster v. State, 582 S.E.2d 513 (Ga. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 8× “However, OCGA § 40-8-26 (b) requires that [ejvery brake light shall be plainly visible and understandable from a distance of 300 feet to the rear both during normal sunlight and at nighttime, and every signal light or lights indicating intention to turn shall be visible and…”

Warren v. State, 561 S.E.2d 190 (Ga. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 2× “As we noted in Warren, supra, “improperly activated backup lights would violate OCGA § 40-8-26 (b)’s requirement that ‘other signal lights .”

Stubbs v. State, 387 S.E.2d 619 (Ga. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 13× “This appeal is from appellant’s conviction for operating a vehicle with defective equipment in violation of OCGA § 40-8-26. The evidence at trial showed that the turn signals on appellant’s vehicle were not operative and that it was struck from the rear while making a left turn…”

Loveless v. the State, 789 S.E.2d 244 (Ga. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 2× “Pursuant to OCGA § 40-8-26 (d), “[a]ll lenses on brake lights and signal devices shall be maintained in good repair and shall meet manufacturers’ specifications.”

The State v. Cartwright, 764 S.E.2d 175 (Ga. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 4× “On redirect, the officer agreed that he could have charged Cartwright with violating OCGA § 40-8-26. That *156 statute requires that [ejvery brake light shall be plainly visible and understandable from a distance of 300 feet to the rear both during normal sunlight and at…”

State v. Warren, 530 S.E.2d 515 (Ga. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 2× “4 Here the cross-examination of the officer raised legitimate credibility issues about his truthfulness, including about whether the backup lights were indeed activated. Thus, we vacate the judgment and remand the case for the trial court to determine whether the officer had a…”

— 40-8-26(a)(2) — 1 case

United States v. Erickson Meko Campbell, 912 F.3d 1340 (11th Cir. 2019). “All that O.C.G.A. § 40-8-26 requires is that the turn signal "indicate a driver's intention to change lanes," and the Maxima's left turn signal was able to do that.”

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.