The Commissioner of Highways may classify, designate, and mark state highways and provide a uniform system of traffic control devices for such highways under the jurisdiction of the Commonwealth. Such system of traffic control devices shall correlate with and, so far as possible, conform to the system adopted in other states.
All drivers of vehicles shall obey lawfully erected traffic control devices.
No provision of this section relating to the prohibition of disobeying traffic control devices or violating local traffic control devices shall be enforced against an alleged violator if, at the time and place of the alleged violation, any such traffic control device is not in proper position and sufficiently legible to be seen by an ordinarily observant person.
Code 1950, § 46-184; 1958, c. 541, § 46.1-173; 1970, c. 163; 1976, c. 184; 1979, c. 604; 1981, c. 585; 1989, c. 727; 1994, c. 280; 1997, c. 881; 2013, cc. 128, 400, 585, 646.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
8
cases (
2 in the last 5 years), 1994–2026 · leading case:
Commonwealth v. Fioramanti, 37 Va. Cir. 599 (Loudoun Cir. Ct. 1994).
Commonwealth v. Fioramanti, 37 Va. Cir. 599 (Loudoun Cir. Ct. 1994).
· cites it 7× “01, § 46.2-830.” It is alleged that the Defendant violated authority regulations and state law by disobeying a sign on the Dulles Access Road which restricts use of the road to “Airport Passengers and Business.”
United States v. Brooks, 64 M.J. 587 (A.C.C.A. 2006).
“2-806; failing to stop at a posted stop sign in violation of Va.Code Ann. § 46.2-830; reckless driving on a roadway or highway in violation of Va.”
John J. Bahen, Jr. v. Cnty. of Henrico, 516 S.E.2d 250 (Va. Ct. App. 1999).
· cites it 2× “” Code § 46.2-830. Furthermore, “[i]t shall be unlawful to operate any motor vehicle in excess of speed limits established and posted as provided [by the Commissioner or other authority having jurisdiction over highways].”
Commonwealth v. Patton, 87 Va. Cir. 215 (Fairfax Cir. Ct. 2013).
· cites it 12× “Fioramanti, the Circuit Court for Loudoun County held that a Defendant was not guilty of driving on an airport-only access road under Va. Code § 46.2-830 because the signs did not properly alert drivers to the road restriction.”
Milazzo v. Elite Contracting Grp. (E.D. Va. 2021).
· cites it 5× “Additionally, Virginia Code § 46.2-830 tasks the Virginia “commissioner of Highways” with the decision to “classify, designate, and mark state highways and provide a uniform system of traffic control devices for such highways.”
United States v. Williams, 629 F. Supp. 2d 539 (E.D. Va. 2009).
· cites it 2× “25 (f), adopting Va. Code Ann. § 46.2-830 (CountV). Defendant moved to suppress the field sobriety tests he took and any statements of “refusal” to take a breathalyzer test that were obtained as a result of what he claimed was an unlawful arrest.”
Hart (W.D. Va. 2026).
“In failing to obey these traffic signs, Hart violated Virginia Code § 46.2-830, which provides that “[a]ll drivers of vehicles shall obey lawfully erected traffic 6 Again, there is no admissible evidence that Quirk was, in fact, speeding.”
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.