A person shall be guilty of reckless driving who drives any motor vehicle so as to be abreast of another vehicle in a lane designed for one vehicle, or drives any motor vehicle so as to travel abreast of any other vehicle traveling in a lane designed for one vehicle. Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit two two-wheeled motorcycles from traveling abreast while traveling in a lane designated for one vehicle. In addition, this section shall not apply to (i) any validly authorized parade, motorcade, or motorcycle escort; (ii) a motor vehicle traveling in the same lane of traffic as a bicycle, electric personal assistive mobility device, electric power-assisted bicycle, or moped; nor shall it apply to (iii) any vehicle when lawfully overtaking and passing one or more vehicles traveling in the same direction in a separate lane.
Code 1950, §§ 46-209, 46-209.1; 1950, p. 880; 1952, c. 671; 1954, cc. 225, 401, 458; 1958, c. 541, § 46.1-190; 1960, c. 510; 1964, c. 266; 1966, c. 694; 1968, c. 575; 1970, c. 521; 1974, cc. 222, 455; 1975, c. 633; 1978, c. 27; 1979, c. 86; 1981, cc. 333, 585; 1985, c. 148; 1989, c. 727; 2001, c. 834; 2002, c. 254; 2010, cc. 52, 110; 2012, c. 7.
Notes of Decisions
Najee Finique Hairston v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 797 S.E.2d 794 (Va. Ct. App. 2017).
· cites it 2× “; Code § 46.2-857 (proscribing reckless driving by “travelling] abreast of any other vehicle traveling in a lane designed for one vehicle”); Code § 46.”
Lilly v. Commonwealth, 647 S.E.2d 517 (Va. Ct. App. 2007).
· cites it 2× “The Commonwealth indicted Lilly for driving after having been declared an habitual offender (second or subsequent offense) triggering the mandatory mini *179 mum sentence of one-year incarceration pursuant to Code § 46.2-857(B)(3). At trial, Lilly attacked the habitual offender…”
George E. Boone v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 758 S.E.2d 72 (Va. Ct. App. 2014).
· cites it 2× “Boone (“Boone”) appeals his conviction of operating a motor vehicle after having been declared a habitual offender, second or subsequent offense, in violation of Code § 46.2-857, after a bench trial in the Circuit Court of Chesterfield County (“trial court”).”
Roberts v. Commonwealth, 504 S.E.2d 890 (Va. Ct. App. 1998).
· cites it 2× “Code § 46.2-857. The trial court erred in finding that Roberts was operating a motor vehicle on a “highway” as defined by Code § 46.”
Flinchum v. Commonwealth, 485 S.E.2d 630 (Va. Ct. App. 1997).
· cites it 2× “appeals his conviction of driving after having been declared an habitual offender in violation of Code § 46.2-857. Flinchum asserts that the trial court erred in finding that he was operating his vehicle on a “highway” as defined by Code § 46.”
Bailey v. Commonwealth, 508 S.E.2d 889 (Va. Ct. App. 1999).
· cites it 4× “Shane Larue Bailey (appellant) appeals his conviction for driving after having been adjudged an habitual offender in violation of Code § 46.2-857. The sole issue raised is whether the evidence established a reasonable, articulable suspicion upon which to stop appellant.”
Emesowum v. Buxton, No. 1:20-cv-00113 (E.D. Va. June 5, 2020).
· cites it 6× “The reckless driving charge, for which defendant Buxton wrote plaintiff a summons as a result of the March 9, 2018 incident, was later amended to a charge of driving two abreast in a single lane, in violation of Va. Code § 46.2-857. After a bench trial, plaintiff was found not…”
Stuart Acree Barbour, Jr. v. Commonwealth, No. 0123963 (Va. Ct. App. Apr. 15, 1997).
· cites it 14× “(appellant) appeals his conviction of improper driving in violation of Code § 46.2-857. He contends that the City of Roanoke Circuit Court (trial court) lacked subject matter jurisdiction over his case and, in the alternative, that the evidence was insufficient to support his…”
Va. Code Ann. § 46.2-857(B)(3): 1 case
Lilly v. Commonwealth, 647 S.E.2d 517 (Va. Ct. App. 2007).
“The Commonwealth indicted Lilly for driving after having been declared an habitual offender (second or subsequent offense) triggering the mandatory mini *179 mum sentence of one-year incarceration pursuant to Code § 46.2-857(B)(3). At trial, Lilly attacked the habitual offender…”
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.