(A) Whenever a motor vehicle is being operated on a roadway or shoulder adjacent thereto during the times specified in section 4513.03 of the Revised Code, the driver shall use a distribution of light, or composite beam, directed high enough and of sufficient intensity to reveal persons, vehicles, and substantial objects at a safe distance in advance of the vehicle, subject to the following requirements;
(1) Whenever the driver of a vehicle approaches an oncoming vehicle, such driver shall use a distribution of light, or composite beam, so aimed that the glaring rays are not projected into the eyes of the oncoming driver.
(2) Every new motor vehicle registered in this state, which has multiple-beam road lighting equipment shall be equipped with a beam indicator, which shall be lighted whenever the uppermost distribution of light from the headlights is in use, and shall not otherwise be lighted. Said indicator shall be so designed and located that, when lighted, it will be readily visible without glare to the driver of the vehicle.
(B) Whoever violates this section is guilty of a minor misdemeanor.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1959–2022 · leading case: State v. Spellacy, 2019 Ohio 785 (Ohio Ct. App. 2019).
State v. Spellacy, 2019 Ohio 785 (Ohio Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 22ד19, and the traffic infraction of failure to dim headlights, in violation of R.C. 4513.15. {¶9} On cross-examination, Officer McDonald admitted that Spellacy’s vehicle was not in motion when he activated his high-beam lights, and that the vehicles facing toward Spellacy’s…”
State v. Fickert, 2018 Ohio 4349 (Ohio Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 26דThe flick of the headlights by Defendant lasted perhaps a second and as such did not appear to create the type of visual impairment that is the concern of O.R.C. 4513.15. Therefore, the trooper was without sufficient grounds in this case to make a stop based solely on the…”
State v. Woods, 621 N.E.2d 523 (Ohio Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 7דThe court indicated a violation of R.C. 4513.15 was sufficient for the initial investigatory stop and denied the motion to suppress.”
City of Westlake v. Kaplysh, 691 N.E.2d 1074 (Ohio Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 3ד14 (O.R.C. 4513.15). “The trial court committed prejudicial error by granting the defendant’s motion to suppress and failing to sustain the police officer’s reasonable articulable suspicion to effect a traffic stop.”
State v. Keserich, 2014 Ohio 5120 (Ohio Ct. App. 2014). “19(A)(1)(H); no license plate light, in violation of R.C. 4513.15; and cracked windshield, in violation of R.”
City of Maple Heights v. Dickard, 508 N.E.2d 994 (Ohio Ct. App. 1986). “20), driving without lights (R.C. 4513.15), excessive exhaust noise (R.”
State v. Reid, 2013 Ohio 562 (Ohio Ct. App. 2013). “19(A)(1)(h), and (2) failure to dim headlights in violation of R.C. 4513.15. Appellee moved to suppress the breath test results and argued that the Intoxilyzer 8000 is not a proven, reliable method to accurately detect breath-alcohol concentration.”
State v. L. Gardner, 2022 MT 3 (Mont. 2022). “Code § 39-21-21 (2021); Ohio Rev. Code Ann. § 4513.15 (LexisNexis 2021); Okla.”
Clevenger v. Huling, 209 N.E.2d 434 (Ohio 1965). · cites it 2ד29, Bevised Code, prohibiting driving to the left of center when overtaking and passing, combined with defendant’s claimed failure to observe the requirement of Section 4513.15, Bevised Code, requiring that his vehicular lights shall reveal “objects at a safe distance in advance…”
Howell v. The Ohio State High. Patrol Subdivision (S.D. Ohio 2019). · cites it 2דErroneously believing that Plaintiff’s use of her high beams behind him was a violation of Ohio Revised Code Section 4513.15, Defendant Shade activated his cruiser’s overhead lights and initiated a non-investigatory traffic stop based upon the perceived violation.”
State v. Tillman, 2018 Ohio 4765 (Ohio Ct. App. 2018). “04(A) (requiring that motor vehicles, other than motorcycles, “be equipped with at least two headlights”) and R.C. 4513.15(A)(1) (requiring that motorists dim their headlights as they approach oncoming vehicles).”
State v. Johnson, 2020 Ohio 3097 (Ohio Ct. App. 2020). “19(A)(1)(a), failure to dim in violation of R.C. 4513.15, driving under suspension in violation of R.”
State v. Fickert, 2018 Ohio 4349 (Ohio Ct. App. 2018). “The flick of the headlights by Defendant lasted perhaps a second and as such did not appear to create the type of visual impairment that is the concern of O.R.C. 4513.15. Therefore, the trooper was without sufficient grounds in this case to make a stop based solely on the…”
State v. Spellacy, 2019 Ohio 785 (Ohio Ct. App. 2019). “19, and the traffic infraction of failure to dim headlights, in violation of R.C. 4513.15. {¶9} On cross-examination, Officer McDonald admitted that Spellacy’s vehicle was not in motion when he activated his high-beam lights, and that the vehicles facing toward Spellacy’s…”
State v. Tillman, 2018 Ohio 4765 (Ohio Ct. App. 2018). “04(A) (requiring that motor vehicles, other than motorcycles, “be equipped with at least two headlights”) and R.C. 4513.15(A)(1) (requiring that motorists dim their headlights as they approach oncoming vehicles).”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 4513.15(B) — 1 case
State v. Fickert, 2018 Ohio 4349 (Ohio Ct. App. 2018). “The flick of the headlights by Defendant lasted perhaps a second and as such did not appear to create the type of visual impairment that is the concern of O.R.C. 4513.15. Therefore, the trooper was without sufficient grounds in this case to make a stop based solely on the…”
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.