Wisconsin Statutes
Wis. Stat. § 346.39 (2026)
Flashing signals
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
346.39346.39 Flashing signals. Whenever flashing red or yellow signals are used they require obedience by vehicular traffic as follows:
346.39(1)(1) Flashing red (stop signal). When a red lens is illuminated with rapid intermittent flashes, operators of vehicles shall stop before entering the nearest crosswalk at an intersection or at a limit line when marked, or, if none, then before entering the intersection, and the right to proceed is subject to the rules applicable after making a stop at a stop sign.
346.39(2)(2) Flashing yellow (caution signal). Subject to s. 346.37 (1) (e), when a yellow lens is illuminated with rapid intermittent flashes, operators of vehicles may proceed through the intersection or past such signal only with caution.
346.39 AnnotationSub. (2) imposes a greater duty of care on a driver proceeding through an intersection with a flashing yellow light than on a driver proceeding where an intersection is not so controlled. Sabinasz v. Milwaukee & Suburban Transport Corp., 71 Wis. 2d 218, 238 N.W.2d 99 (1976).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9
cases, 1950–2020 · leading case: State v. Daniel S. Iverson, 2015 WI 101 (Wis. 2015).
State v. Daniel S. Iverson, 2015 WI 101 (Wis. 2015). “§ 346.39(2) provides that "operators of vehicles may proceed through the intersection or past [a flashing yellow light] only with caution.”
Henrikson v. Strapon, 2008 WI App 145 (Wis. Ct. App. 2008). “The evidence showing aggravated conduct, according to Henrikson is: he did not yield to a flashing red traffic signal, in violation of Wis. Stat. § 346.39 (1); he did not see or yield to a pedestrian in the crosswalk, in violation of Wis.”
Sabinasz v. Milwaukee & Suburban Transp. Corp., 238 N.W.2d 99 (Wis. 1976). “Section 346.39, Stats., says: “Whenever flashing red or yellow signals are used they require obedience by vehicular traffic as follows: .”
Seitz v. Seitz, 151 N.W.2d 86 (Wis. 1967). “(1) and (2) of sec. 346.39, Stats., do impose a greater degree of care upon the motorist who, having come to a stop, enters an intersection against a flashing red light than one who enters upon a flashing yellow light.”
State v. Naydihor, 483 N.W.2d 253 (Wis. Ct. App. 1992). “Carr On March 2, 1991, Leroy Carr was cited for failing to yield at a flashing red light, contrary to sec. 346.39(1), Stats. A routine driving status check revealed that he was a habitual traffic offender (HTO) who was driving after revocation.”
Ide v. Wamser, 126 N.W.2d 59 (Wis. 1964). “The intersection in question was regulated by flashing signals, pursuant to sec. 346.39, Stats. We believe that the legislature intended to impose upon an arterial driver approaching a flashing yellow light a somewhat added caution than that governing other arterial highways.”
Teske v. State, 41 N.W.2d 642 (Wis. 1950). “Defendant Young was convicted of violation of sec. 346.39, Stats., which provides: “Any person who shall knowingly resist any sheriff, deputy sheriff, constable, marshal, conservation warden, or other ministerial officer while engaged in the lawful execution of any civil or…”
Smith v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins., 203 N.W.2d 34 (Wis. 1973). “Seitz, supra, wherein this court discussed at length the rights and duties of the drivers at an intersection controlled by flashing red and yellow lights, as established by sec. 346.39, Stats. The rule in the Seitz case does not establish different standards of care as to…”
State v. Jacqueline A. Ziriax Anderson (Wis. Ct. App. 2020). “§ 346.46(1), in turn, provides that after stopping at a stop sign a driver must yield the right-of-way to other vehicles that have entered or are approaching the intersection.”
— Wis. Stat. § 346.39(1) — 2 cases
State v. Naydihor, 483 N.W.2d 253 (Wis. Ct. App. 1992). “Carr On March 2, 1991, Leroy Carr was cited for failing to yield at a flashing red light, contrary to sec. 346.39(1), Stats. A routine driving status check revealed that he was a habitual traffic offender (HTO) who was driving after revocation.”
State v. Jacqueline A. Ziriax Anderson (Wis. Ct. App. 2020). “§ 346.46(1), in turn, provides that after stopping at a stop sign a driver must yield the right-of-way to other vehicles that have entered or are approaching the intersection.”
— Wis. Stat. § 346.39(2) — 1 case
State v. Daniel S. Iverson, 2015 WI 101 (Wis. 2015). “§ 346.39(2) provides that "operators of vehicles may proceed through the intersection or past [a flashing yellow light] only with caution.”
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.