NM Stat § 66-7-319 (2021)
2021 New Mexico Statutes|Chapter 66 - Motor Vehicles|Article 7 - Traffic Laws; Signs, Signals and Markings; Accidents; Weight and Size; Traffic Safety|Part 4 - TRAFFIC LAWS GENERALLY|Section 66-7-319 - Driving on divided highways.

Whenever any highway has been divided into two roadways by leaving an intervening space or by a physical barrier or clearly indicated dividing section so constructed as to impede vehicular traffic, every vehicle shall be driven only upon the right-hand roadway and no vehicle shall be driven over, across or within any such dividing space, barrier or section, except through an opening in such physical barrier or dividing section or space or at a crossover or intersection established by public authority. History: 1941 Comp., § 68-2418, enacted by Laws 1953, ch. 139, § 73; 1953 Comp., § 64-18-18; recompiled as 1953 Comp., § 64-7-319, by Laws 1978, ch. 35, § 423. ANNOTATIONSCross references. — For the penalty assessment for violation, see 66-8-116 NMSA 1978. Not lack of care if in proper lane. — Truck driver in west northbound lane of four-lane divided highway was proceeding in compliance with this section; he was in a lane where he had a right to be. He, therefore, cannot be held liable for lack of ordinary care, even though his truck blocked the view of the truck beside his. Butcher v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 1967-NMCA-029, 78 N.M. 593, 435 P.2d 212. Accident not unavoidable where obstruction seen moments before. — The presence of an island dividing traffic to right and left in a roadway traveled moments before when proceeding in the opposite direction controverted defendant's argument that he was so surprised by the sudden appearance and unanticipated presence of the island and divided roadway as to make what followed an unavoidable accident. Baros v. Kazmierczwk, 1961-NMSC-055, 68 N.M. 421, 362 P.2d 798. Negligence not predicated upon mere intent to violate section. — Where it is undisputed that the plaintiff's car was standing still in her right-hand roadway and that at the time of the collision no part of her automobile had crossed any intervening space, physical barrier or dividing section of the roadway, her mere intention to cross the dividing line, even if such a crossing would violate this section, does not constitute a violation of it. Certainly negligence cannot be predicated upon a mere intention to do a prohibited act. McKeough v. Ryan, 1968-NMSC-150, 79 N.M. 520, 445 P.2d 585. "Working on highway" exemption strictly construed. — The provisions of Section 64-15-4, 1953 Comp. (similar to Section 66-7-5 NMSA 1978) creating the exemption for work on the highway should be strictly construed and the right of the defendant to the benefits of the exemption must be clear and unmistakable. Sturgeon v. Clark, 1961-NMSC-125, 69 N.M. 132, 364 P.2d 757. Sufficient evidence of offense. — Where the evidence showed that defendant drove defendant's vehicle across the median separating the easterly and westerly highways of an interstate highway at a point where there was no authorized crossover or intersection and defendant stated that defendant knew that defendant was not supposed to cross the median, the evidence was sufficient to support defendant's conviction of unlawful driving on a divided highway. State v. Baldwin, 2001-NMCA-063, 130 N.M. 705, 30 P.3d 394. Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — 7A Am. Jur. 2d Automobiles and Highway Traffic § 260. 60A C.J.S. Motor Vehicles § 278.