Failure to Obey a Traffic Control Device (TA Section 21-201(a)(1))

“Failure to obey a traffic control device” is one of Maryland’s most flexible—and most commonly charged—traffic offenses. Because many roadway signs and signals qualify as “devices,” this citation can appear after stops involving lane control, turn restrictions, posted instructions, or detours. The good news is that the charge often rests on brief observations and can be reduced or resolved without points if you approach it strategically.

The statute and what it covers

Transportation Article Section 21‑201(a)(1) requires a driver to obey the instructions of any official traffic control device unless otherwise directed by a police officer. A “device” can include:

• Stop, yield, and “Do Not Enter” signs
• Lane use control and turn‑restriction signs
• Speed limit and advisory signs (paired with other behavior)
• Flashing lights, arrow boards, detour placards, and more

Because the statute refers to “instructions,” the State must connect the device’s directive to your driving behavior at the relevant moment.

How these cases are proven

Most trials center on the officer’s vantage point, the specific device, and how clearly the instruction applied to your lane and movement. The State typically presents:

• The exact device and where it was placed
• Your lane, speed, and maneuver (turning, lane change, entry)
• Whether the device was visible, unambiguous, and applicable to your approach

We focus on line of sight, sign placement, temporary obstructions (construction cones, parked trucks), and whether the device governed a different lane or approach.

Points and penalties

Failure to obey a traffic control device is a moving violation that can result in points through the Motor Vehicle Administration under Maryland’s points framework. Points can impact insurance and, in higher totals, trigger MVA action. Our priority is to avoid any points via dismissal, a reduction to a non‑moving or lesser‑point offense, or a Probation Before Judgment (PBJ) outcome.

Case‑law considerations (Maryland context)

In Maryland, this citation is frequently used to justify a traffic stop when an officer believes a driver failed to comply with posted lane‑use signs, no‑turn‑on‑red restrictions, stop‑line placement, or temporary traffic‑control boards. Courts routinely evaluate whether the officer had a particularized, objective basis tied to an actual device and an instruction that applied to the driver’s lane and movement. Practical issues that matter:

• Visibility and placement: A partially obstructed or poorly placed device can undercut the basis for a stop.
• Applicability: Lane‑use and turn‑restriction devices govern specific approaches or time windows; if a device did not apply to your lane or time of travel, the instruction may not have bound you.
• Temporary vs. permanent devices: Where flaggers, arrow boards, or temporary cones alter traffic, the State must establish which instruction controlled at the moment.
• Reasonableness under conditions: Curves, glare, heavy traffic, or unclear pavement markings can affect what a reasonable driver perceives.

When the government’s proof of a control device or its applicability is thin, suppression of the stop (and any evidence gathered thereafter) can follow in the DUI/traffic context. Conversely, where a clearly applicable device is visible and a specific noncompliant movement is observed, courts generally find reasonable suspicion for the stop—even if a different, lesser disposition is ultimately negotiated.

How this charge appears in DUI stops

“Failure to obey a traffic control device” often appears as the stated basis for a DUI stop—e.g., an alleged right‑turn on red without stopping where a “No Turn on Red” sign applies, driving straight from a turn‑only lane, entering against a “Do Not Enter”/“One Way” sign, or stopping past a stop line into a crosswalk. In defending the DUI, we frequently litigate the stop first:

• Identify the exact device and its placement (photos/video)
• Confirm whether the device applied to your lane, approach, or time window
• Assess visibility, obstructions, and traffic conditions impacting driver perception

If the stop is unsupported, the DUI case can be significantly weakened. When a negotiated resolution is the better path, we aim to re‑characterize the citation to a no‑point outcome or PBJ to protect your record.

Defense angles that matter

1. Placement and visibility of the device

• Was the sign or signal partially obstructed by foliage, construction equipment, or other vehicles? We often use photos or video to show what a driver could reasonably see.

2. Applicability to your lane and approach

• Lane‑use and turn‑restriction signs can govern only certain lanes or time periods. If the device did not apply to your position or time of travel, the instruction may not have been binding.

3. Temporary controls vs. permanent devices

• Arrow boards, police barricades, and flagger instructions are frequently misread. If a worker or officer directed a different movement, that direction controls—potentially defeating the charge.

4. Reasonable driver response under the conditions

• Sudden hazards, emergency vehicles, and unexpected road users can make compliance unsafe. Maryland law does not require a driver to choose a dangerous option to obey a sign.

5. Clean record and mitigation

• Even when liability isn’t contested, driver improvement, a clean history, and proof of need can support a no‑point disposition.

What to do after the ticket

• Do not pay online. Paying is a guilty plea and accepts any points.
• Request a trial date so we can test the State’s proof and pursue a point‑free resolution.
• Take photos or short video of the approach, the device placement, and any obstructions.
• Bring your driving history and proof of need (work/school/childcare) to help target PBJ if needed.

Court strategy

We prepare for trial by locking in the exact device and its placement and then pairing that with video or photos that reflect the driver’s true perspective. When a trial‑first approach isn’t the best fit, we press for a negotiated result that avoids points and insurance spikes.

For how this citation is used as a basis for impaired‑driving stops—and how we challenge it—see our Maryland DUI overview.

Related citations

• Improper lane change (see our Maryland guide)
• Failure to signal (turn and lane change)
• Disobeying lane‑use control signals

These charges often travel together. We aim to reduce the overall package to a single, point‑free outcome where possible.

Get help

Failure to obey a traffic control device is beatable—and even when the facts are tough, points can often be avoided. Request a trial date, gather key photos, and contact us for a free case review. We defend these citations statewide and align the court strategy with MVA and insurance concerns to protect your ability to drive.

See our overview: Maryland Traffic Lawyers for how points work and why trial settings and PBJ strategies matter.