7.758 — DEFACING OR INTERFERING WITH A TRAFFIC CONTROLLED DEVICE

Violations of "Statute 7.758" results in a Class E Misdemeanor

---

(a) Definitions

Defacing or interfering with a traffic controlled device refers to the intentional alteration, destruction, damage, or obstruction of any traffic control device or sign. This includes actions such as graffiti, physical damage, obscuring, or rendering traffic signals, signs, or markings illegible or nonfunctional. These devices are essential for public safety, directing traffic, and preventing accidents, and interference with them creates hazards for drivers, pedestrians, and law enforcement.

(b) Elements

To establish the offense of defacing or interfering with a traffic controlled device, the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt the following elements:

• The defendant knowingly and intentionally tampered with or defaced a traffic control device or sign.

• The device or sign was intended to regulate, warn, or guide traffic.

• The defendant's actions caused the device to become less effective, altered its appearance, or interfered with its intended function.

• The defendant's actions were not authorized by law or any governing authority responsible for traffic control.

(c) Defenses

Defenses against a charge of defacing or interfering with a traffic controlled device may include:

• The defendant did not intentionally alter or interfere with the device, and the alteration or interference was accidental or unintentional.

• The defendant was acting under the lawful authority of a government or regulatory agency with the proper permission to modify or remove the traffic control device.

• The traffic control device was already damaged or defaced before the defendant’s involvement and was not altered or damaged by the defendant’s actions.

(d) Aggravating Factors

The court may consider the following aggravating factors when determining the severity of the offense:

• The defendant’s interference caused significant danger or disruption to traffic flow, resulting in accidents, injuries, or fatalities.

• The defendant has a history of similar offenses, such as tampering with public property or traffic-related violations.

• The defendant’s actions involved vandalism or deliberate destruction of the device, and not just minor interference.

• The defendant interfered with a traffic control device in a high-risk area, such as near a school, highway, or construction zone, increasing the risk to public safety.