18 U.S.C. § 39

Traffic signal preemption transmitters

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 18 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a)Offenses.—(1)Sale.—Whoever, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, knowingly sells a traffic signal preemption transmitter to a nonqualifying user shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned not more than 1 year, or both.(2)Use.—Whoever, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, being a nonqualifying user makes unauthorized use of a traffic signal preemption transmitter shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both.(b)Definitions.—In this section, the following definitions apply:(1)Traffic signal preemption transmitter.—The term “traffic signal preemption transmitter” means any mechanism that can change or alter a traffic signal’s phase time or sequence.(2)Nonqualifying user.—The term “nonqualifying user” means a person who uses a traffic signal preemption transmitter and is not acting on behalf of a public agency or private corporation authorized by law to provide fire protection, law enforcement, emergency medical services, transit services, maintenance, or other services for a Federal, State, or local government entity, but does not include a person using a traffic signal preemption transmitter for classroom or instructional purposes.(Added Pub. L. 109–59, title II, § 2018(a), Aug. 10, 2005, 119 Stat. 1542.)Editorial NotesCodification

Another section 39 was renumbered section 40 of this title.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 3 cases, 1948–2018 · leading case: Vermilya-Brown Co. v. Connell, 335 U.S. 377 (1948).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Vermilya-Brown Co. v. Connell, 335 U.S. 377 (1948). · cites it 2× “231 , § 1, 18 U. S. C. § 39 (1917) (“The term ‘United States’ .”

United States v. Baca, 350 F. Supp. 3d 1164 (D.N.M. 2018). · cites it 3× “PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND On September 6, 2017, a federal grand jury charged Baca with one count of aiming a laser pointer at an aircraft, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 39 (a). See Indictment at 1. On May 8, 2018, Baca pled guilty to the Indictment that he knowingly aimed the beam of…”

Vermilya-Brown Co. v. Connell, 335 U.S. 377 (1948). · cites it 2× “231 , § 1, 18 U.S.C. § 39 (1917) ("The term `United States' .”

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.