Traffic Law Question...

[Dixie]

I have a question about u-turns and Maryland law.

At the intersection of Chancellors Run and 235 - if the cars leaving Chancellors are in the left hand turn lane there is an arrow that looks to me like you should just turn left, but instead of doing that I see some cars make a u-turn to go right back on Chancelors.

So I wondered, there was a car in front of me yesterday that was turning into Chancellors from 235 (at the yield). He nearly got creamed. He had a yield and did pause to look but it was at the turn lane that would have been on the opposite side of 235. The car that was leaving Chancellors to turn back on to Chancellors really flipped that corner quickly. Who would have been at fault?

 

[desertrat]

I agree. I wasn't aware you had to wait until the light turns green and vehicles moved in front of you before you could get in service lane to make a right into the BP, or even the 7/11 entrance up there for that matter. You are making a right hand turn, it has nothing to do with the vehicles going straight and whether they are stopped or not. It just all sounds silly. Hope the judge see's it the same way

He might and they can certainly reduce the fine or the points if any would apply.

 

[chevy]

I'm sure if he would have waited until he was 1-2 car lengths from the intersection he wouldn’t have had an issue. If the officer had time to see him coming and cut him off…he had to be 10+ cars back. The emergency lane isn’t intended for passing. Even if it seems to be a standard in SOMD it is unsafe and he got what he deserved IMO.

 

[SoMDMama82]

Right... So because he used the shoulder to pass vehicles that were stopped at the stoplight, it was not legal to do so.

I think he said he only passed one car before he got to the entrance to the BP, but I guess passing is passing. I know the McDonalds entrance/exit is very close to the BP, so it wasn't like his purpose was to pass vehicles. But like they say, ignorance of the law is no excuse

 

[tes218]

If you can, take some pictures of the road before you go in. My ex did this when he got a ticket for a similar situation and it helped him explain the way the road was marked. The judge agreed it wasn't clearly marked and he got off.

 

[Ponytail]

Go to court. Bring the gas receipt. If the cop shows up, you have a SLIGHT argument, but ONLY if you have the gas reciept. No receipt, it looks like you are Full-o-crapola.

Had someone else in that line made a LEGAL right turn into one of the other businesses, or even the BP, your friend would be at fault if an accident had occurred for driving on the shoulder and passing on the right.

You have a SLIGHT case, if you can show that you proceeded with caution and your only intention was to get gas. Plead stupidity without attitude and even if you lose, maybe you'll get fine only and no points or maybe even a reduced fine. Shoot for no points though. It's cheaper in the long run.

 

[BernieP]

Also:
Definition of Roadway:
§ 11-151.
(a) "Roadway" means that part of a highway that is improved, designed, or ordinarily used for vehicular travel, other than the shoulder.

thank you Johnnie Cochrane. Note that it specifies "other then the shoulder" it is my experiece that anything to the right of that solid white line is considered the shoulder.
IMO, dumb ticket. I would also suggest they find the section of the motor vehicle regs specifed on the ticket (the reference number should be there). If, after reading the section, they think they are in the clear then I would tell them to fight it. Question is, is it worth their time to do so. Sorry if I offend any fine law enforcement officers out there but I've also seen a fair number of money grubbing tickets written with the hope the driver decides it's not worth fighting.

 

[toogie]

I have a question about u-turns and Maryland law.

At the intersection of Chancellors Run and 235 - if the cars leaving Chancellors are in the left hand turn lane there is an arrow that looks to me like you should just turn left, but instead of doing that I see some cars make a u-turn to go right back on Chancelors.

So I wondered, there was a car in front of me yesterday that was turning into Chancellors from 235 (at the yield). He nearly got creamed. He had a yield and did pause to look but it was at the turn lane that would have been on the opposite side of 235. The car that was leaving Chancellors to turn back on to Chancellors really flipped that corner quickly. Who would have been at fault?

I would imagine that would depend on if there is a "No U Turn" sign there or not... I have another question...If a train leaves Chicago at a rate of 100 MPH, and another train leaves Houston at half that rate of speed... oh, never mind...

 

[LordStanley]

I have a question about u-turns and Maryland law.

At the intersection of Chancellors Run and 235 - if the cars leaving Chancellors are in the left hand turn lane there is an arrow that looks to me like you should just turn left, but instead of doing that I see some cars make a u-turn to go right back on Chancelors.

So I wondered, there was a car in front of me yesterday that was turning into Chancellors from 235 (at the yield). He nearly got creamed. He had a yield and did pause to look but it was at the turn lane that would have been on the opposite side of 235. The car that was leaving Chancellors to turn back on to Chancellors really flipped that corner quickly. Who would have been at fault?

The guy at the yield sign..... Regardless if he is turning, the southbound traffic had a red light. The people making the U-turn have the right of way since thier light is green.

Hence the yield sign.....

It seems to be an issue around here, about who has the right of way at intersections and right turn lanes and yield signs.

 

[chevy]

I think he said he only passed one car before he got to the entrance to the BP,

If this is the case he should spend a bit of his off time at that intersection prior to his court date. Count the turning cars and count how many do what he did. Do it in a scientific type manner (same time, traffic flow etc). If there is a high percentage of people doing the same thing...address that to the court and suggest the lines be changed. It also will show the judge he didnt have wrong intentions and really didnt understand the road markings.

 

[toogie]

I think he said he only passed one car before he got to the entrance to the BP, but I guess passing is passing. I know the McDonalds entrance/exit is very close to the BP, so it wasn't like his purpose was to pass vehicles. But like they say, ignorance of the law is no excuse

Go to court and I hope he wins, especially so I can appeal the decision in my case for the exact same thing!

 

[dems4me]

I would imagine that would depend on if there is a "No U Turn" sign there or not... I have another question...If a train leaves Chicago at a rate of 100 MPH, and another train leaves Houston at half that rate of speed... oh, never mind...

 

[desertrat]

I have a question about u-turns and Maryland law.

At the intersection of Chancellors Run and 235 - if the cars leaving Chancellors are in the left hand turn lane there is an arrow that looks to me like you should just turn left, but instead of doing that I see some cars make a u-turn to go right back on Chancelors.

So I wondered, there was a car in front of me yesterday that was turning into Chancellors from 235 (at the yield). He nearly got creamed. He had a yield and did pause to look but it was at the turn lane that would have been on the opposite side of 235. The car that was leaving Chancellors to turn back on to Chancellors really flipped that corner quickly. Who would have been at fault?

U turns are legal (if ill advised) unless there's a sign saying NO U TURN.

 

[desertrat]

The guy at the yield sign..... Regardless if he is turning, the southbound traffic had a red light. The people making the U-turn have the right of way since thier light is green.

Hence the yield sign.....

It seems to be an issue around here, about who has the right of way at intersections and right turn lanes and yield signs.

Yeah, people using that yeild exit seem suprised when they actually have to. Same with a few other places.

 

[toogie]

U turns are legal (if ill advised) unless there's a sign saying NO U TURN.

So in this case, the car making the LEGAL "U Turn" had the right of way. Anyone else feel like Judge Judy?

 

[desertrat]

So in this case, the car making the LEGAL "U Turn" had the right of way. Anyone else feel like Judge Judy?

NEXT CASE!



But, no, I don't feel like Judy.

 

[aFTeRLiFe]

Actually if I remember correctly, there is a No U-Turn sign there. Unless they taken that down. So therefore that person making the illegal u-turn is at fault. But then again I don't know anything about traffic laws, stops.

 

[MMDad]

Actually if I remember correctly, there is a No U-Turn sign there. Unless they taken that down. So therefore that person making the illegal u-turn is at fault. But then again I don't know anything about traffic laws, stops.

Nope, there is no sign there. People demanded a sign, the state said they would put one up, so the people were satisfied. They never actually got around to putting up the sign.

 

[FrankBama1234]

I have seen judges rule that the right side of the road is part of the "roadway". Therefore, it IS legal to drive down that part of the road if your intention was to turn. It depends on the judge and how he interprets the law. And what kind of mood he's in.

 

[aFTeRLiFe]

Nope, there is no sign there. People demanded a sign, the state said they would put one up, so the people were satisfied. They never actually got around to putting up the sign.

There was one, and I can swear there is or was. It was to your left, as you go out to 235. I seen it a few times and just started shaking my head when I seen a few people doing it. Because I seen a couple people almost collide from the yield sign and U-turners.