What is correct section for no rt turn on red

[Pugilist]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? California
What CVC section is violating a no right turn on red sign? 21453a, 21453b, or 21453c.

P

[FlyingRon]

(a) is technically what you violated, but (b) wouldn't be out of the question as a cite. (a) says you must stop at a red, unless you do (b). If you don't do (b) (i.e., don't stop and yield, or there's a sign prohibiting it) you are guilty of (a) as you didn't comply with the exception.

(c) only applies if there is a red arrow rather than a red ball showing.

[I_Got_Banned]

(a) is a standard red light violation
(b) is the "No Turn On Red" violation
(c) is the no turn on red arrow

21453. (a) A driver facing a steady circular red signal alone shall stop at a marked limit line, but if none, before entering the crosswalk on the near side of the intersection or, if none, then before entering the intersection, and shall remain stopped until an indication to proceed is shown, except as provided in subdivision (b).

21453.(b) Except when a sign is in place prohibiting a turn, a driver, after stopping as required by subdivision (a), facing a steady circular red signal, may turn right, or turn left from a one-way street onto a one-way street. A driver making that turn shall yield the right-of-way to pedestrians lawfully within an adjacent crosswalk and to any vehicle that has approached or is approaching so closely as to constitute an immediate hazard to the driver, and shall continue to yield the right-of-way to that vehicle until the driver can proceed with reasonable safety.

21453. (c) A driver facing a steady red arrow signal shall not enter the intersection to make the movement indicated by the arrow and, unless entering the intersection to make a movement permitted by another signal, shall stop at a clearly marked limit line, but if none, before entering the crosswalk on the near side of the intersection, or if none, then before entering the intersection, and shall remain stopped until an indication permitting movement is shown.

[CdwJava]

That depends ... what did you do? A couple of these can overlap.

- Carl

[Pugilist]

THere was a sign saying no turn on red. I didn't see it. The signal was red. I stopped behind the limit line, checked for cross traffic (there was none), hit the gas and made the turn.

[FlyingRon]

(a) is probably more correct because (b) says it doesn't apply when there is a sign to the contrary, but you could argue that you're violating (b) as well.

Either way, you're guilty

[thedoctorisin]

My reading of (b) is that it applies when the person turning on red failed to yield to pedestrians or other vehicles.

[I_Got_Banned]

The OP violated (b)... Plain and simple!

[CdwJava]

Originally Posted by I_Got_Banned

The OP violated (b)... Plain and simple!

I hate to say it, but ... no. The (b) section has to do with yielding after coming to a stop and before making a right turn. The OP came to a complete stop then turned when safe. What he did was fail to obey an official traffic control device (a sign indicating no turn on red). I believe the (b) section mentions the sign provision only to keep it from being used as an excuse not to heed such a sign .."But the section says I can make a turn after stopping and yielding!"

That section has to do with yielding and not requiring that one adhere to a traffic sign.

I would have cited for CVC 21461(a):

21461. (a) It is unlawful for a driver of a vehicle to fail to obey
a sign or signal defined as regulatory in the federal Manual on
Uniform Traffic Control Devices, or a Department of Transportation
approved supplement to that manual of a regulatory nature erected or
maintained to enhance traffic safety and operations or to indicate
and carry out the provisions of this code or a local traffic
ordinance or resolution adopted pursuant to a local traffic
ordinance, or to fail to obey a device erected or maintained by
lawful authority of a public body or official.

If he was cited for ANY of the 21453 subsections because of a failure to heed the sign, I believe he should prevail at trial.

- Carl

[I_Got_Banned]

Originally Posted by CdwJava

I hate to say it, but ... no.

Thanks Carl. That's why you have a badge and a gun & I don't!!!

[CdwJava]

Originally Posted by I_Got_Banned

Thanks Carl. That's why you have a badge and a gun & I don't!!!

Well, that only makes me "right" when you are arguing with me on the street.

- Carl

[I_Got_Banned]

Originally Posted by CdwJava

Well, that only makes me "right" when you are arguing with me on the street.

- Carl

I higly doubt we'd have that problem. I'm not the type to argue with law enforcement & with as clear and concise as you typically are, I'd be pushing my luck to argue with you about anything.

[thedoctorisin]

Originally Posted by thedoctorisin

My reading of (b) is that it applies when the person turning on red failed to yield to pedestrians or other vehicles.

Originally Posted by CdwJava

The (b) section has to do with yielding after coming to a stop and before making a right turn.

Swish!

[FlyingRon]

He's still guilty of 21453 (a).

(a) says you have to wait for green, as the exception doesn't apply in (b)

I'll buy that he also 21461(a).

[CdwJava]

Originally Posted by FlyingRon

He's still guilty of 21453 (a).

(a) says you have to wait for green, as the exception doesn't apply in (b)

I'll buy that he also 21461(a).

But (a) requires only a complete stop - he did that ... and (b) doesn't prevent the right turn unless it cannot be done safely, it doesn't require a yield to the sign ... I'd say he complied with the 21453 sections, and he did NOT comply with 21461.

While I have never seen a successful (a) prosecution for this offense, I suppose there could be a judge who would find (a) or even (b) appropriate.

I used to work in a jurisdiction where we had a number of these signs and the courts informed us NOT to cite for 21453 ... I suppose that could have been the position of the San Diego County Superior Court, but I'd have to assume it was based on some opinion somewhere.

- Carl