2023 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 66-7-318 - Following too closely.

A. The driver of a motor vehicle shall not follow another vehicle more closely than is reasonable and prudent, having due regard for the speed of the vehicles and the traffic upon and the condition of the highway.
B. The driver of any motor truck or motor vehicle drawing another vehicle when traveling upon a roadway outside of a business or residence district shall not follow another motor truck or motor vehicle drawing another vehicle within three hundred feet, except that this shall not prevent a motor truck or motor vehicle drawing another vehicle from overtaking and passing any like vehicle or other vehicle.
C. Motor vehicles being driven upon any roadway outside of a business or residence district in a caravan or motorcade, whether or not towing other vehicles, shall not follow the preceding vehicle closer than three hundred feet. This provision shall not apply to:
(1) funeral processions nor shall it apply within or outside of a business or residence district to motor vehicle escort vehicles of a motor vehicle escort service, which may, if necessary to maintain the continuity of the escorted unit or units, precede or follow at a distance closer than three hundred feet to the escorted unit or units; or
(2) a vehicle that is part of a driver-assisted platoon and that is not the lead motor vehicle.
History:
1941 Comp., § 68-2417, enacted by Laws 1953, ch. 139, § 72; 1953 Comp., § 64-18-17; Laws 1971, ch. 255, § 2; recompiled as 1953 Comp., § 64-7-318, by Laws 1978, ch. 35, § 422; 2021, ch. 114, § 6.
ANNOTATIONS
Cross references.
— For the definitions of "business district" and "residence district",
see
66-1-4.2 and 66-1-4.15 NMSA 1978, respectively.
For the penalty assessment for violation,
see
66-8-116 NMSA 1978.
The 2021 amendment,
effective July 1, 2022, provided an additional exception to the provision prohibiting drivers from following other vehicles too closely; and added Paragraph C(2).
Violation is proper question for jury.
— Violations of Sections 64-18-4, 1953 Comp. (similar to Section 66-7-305 NMSA 1978) (driving so slow as to impede traffic), 64-18-49, 1953 Comp. (similar to Section 66-7-349 NMSA 1978) (stopping on a highway) and Subsection A of this section (following too closely), which were enacted for the benefit of the public, were proper questions for jury.
Archuleta v. Johnston
, 1971-NMCA-158, 83 N.M. 380, 492 P.2d 997, cert. denied, 83 N.M. 379, 492 P.2d 996.
Violation is negligence per se.
— Where an ordinance, in force at the time of a collision, is substantially the same as Subsection A of this section, and there is substantial evidence of its violation, it is error not to instruct the jury that violation of the ordinance constitutes negligence per se, or as a matter of law.
Rogers v. Thomas
, 1970-NMCA-089, 81 N.M. 723, 472 P.2d 986.
The fact that defendant rear-ended the plaintiffs' vehicle, while being aware of the busy traffic conditions, with the sun in his eyes, was strong evidence that he followed another vehicle more closely than was reasonable and prudent, in violation of this section which constituted negligence per se.
Lozoya v. Sanchez
, 2003-NMSC-009, 133 N.M. 579, 66 P.3d 948,
abrogated Heath v. La Mariana Apartments
, 2008-NMSC-017, 143 N.M. 657, 180 P.3d 664.
Section not unconstitutionally vague.
— Where defendant was charged with DWI after his vehicle was stopped for following too closely behind another vehicle, and where defendant moved to suppress evidence of intoxication obtained after the stop, claiming that 66-7-318 NMSA 1978 is unconstitutionally vague and that the officer therefore lacked reasonable suspicion to stop his vehicle, the district court did not err in denying defendant's motion to suppress, because the "reasonable and prudent" standard provided in this section provides adequate notice to drivers of what driving behavior is proscribed by the statute and does not invite ad hoc application or inconsistent enforcement.
State v. Chavez
, 2018-NMCA-056.
Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references.
— 7A Am. Jur. 2d Automobiles and Highway Traffic § 261.
Liability for injury or damages resulting from operation of vehicle in funeral procession or in procession, which is claimed to have special status, 52 A.L.R. 5th 155.
60A C.J.S. Motor Vehicles §§ 323(2), 326.