The driver of a truck or bus may not be charged with a crime of violation of either Sec. 304.017 or Sec. 304.044.2 when following a vehicle other than another truck or bus.

MOTOR VEHICLES : The driver of a truck o~ bus may not be cnarged with a crime for violation of either Sec . 3c:q;..017 or Sec . 3ot .044 . 2 ''~hen fol'lo,'i'ing a vehicle other than another truck or bus . TRUCKS : OPINION NO . 393 (1961) 29 (1962) Marc.1 6, 1962 Honorable William w. Hoertel Prosecuting Attorney Phelps County Rolla, Missouri Dear Sir: We are in receipt of your request for an opinion or t his office, the relevant portion of which reads as follows: "This is a formal request t or an opinion concerning Sections 304 .017~ and 304.044, Rev1sed Statutes of Missouri, 1959. It seems t hat I have run across what appears to be a s1 tuat1on of 1Imnun1 ty for a trucker . In Section 304.017, the statute reads that •a driver of a vehicle other than t hose designate~ 1n Section 304.044, R.S. f.1o . shall not follow another vehicle more closely than is reasonably sate and prudent • • • • • (Emphasis nd.ne . ) When we look at Section 304.044, ( 2), 1t states, 'the driver of any truck or bus, when traveling upon a public highway of this state, outs1~e of a bus~ness or residential district, shall not follow within ~00 feet of another such vehicle; • * *'• (Emphasis mine.) - ··~ question, t herefore, is this: assuming a motor vehicle 1n the form of an automobile 1s d.ri ving along a public highway outside of the c1 ty l ind ts of any g1 ven tO\m or c1 t y . Further assumi.ng that t he truck 1e follotting t his automobile. and that the truck is fol- lowing no close that when the automobile Honorable William W. Hoertel gives signal and turns from the road. the automobile is struck in the rear by the truck. 11Under that set of facts. rtfT question is whether or not t he t ruck driver can be charged with a misdemeanor under eit her Section 304.017 or 304.044, or whether or not. by accident, the legislature has pro• vided an immunity t o the truck driver for this type criminal charge. u Sections 304.017 and 304.044.2. RSMo 1959, to which you make reference, are as follows: §3o4.0l7 • ..-The driver of a vehicle other than those designated in section 304.044 shall not follow another vehicle more closely than is reasonably safe and prudent, having due regard for the speed of such vehicle and the traffic upon and the condition of t he roadw~ . Vehicles being driven upon ~ roadway outside of a business or residence district in a caravan or motorcade, whether or not totdng other vehicles, shall be so operated, except in a funeral procession or in a duly authorized parade, so as to allow sufficient space between each such vehicle or combination o£ vehiales as to enable any other vehicle to overtake or pass such ve- hicles in safety. This section shall in no manner affect section 304.044 relating to distance between trucks traveling on the tdgh~ . ·l §304.044.2. "The driver or any truclc or bus, when traveling upon a public highway of this state outside of a bus~ness or residential district, shall not follow within t hree hundred feet of another such vehicle; pro- vided. t he provisions of this section shall not be construed to prevent the overtaking and passing, by any such truck or bus, of another similar vehicle . n - 2- Honorable William W. Hoertel Violation of either of t he quoted sections is made a mis- demeanor (§304.026, 304.044.3, RSMo 1959) . Prom a reading of Section 304.017, it is evident that the drivers of trucks and buses (the subjects of §304.044) are exempted from the requirement or a "reasonably safe and prudont 11 following distance as provided therein. This is the construction given that section by our Supreme Court in Thebeau v ~ Thebeau, fito., 324 SW2d 674, where the Court said (l.c. 678J: "We have no doubt that the main purpose of section 304.044 was, as t he Mar.yland court held• to provide sufficient space between trucks and busses to permit lighter vehicles to pass, but we are not persuaded t hat this was 1 ts only purpose. We think it obvious that as a trattie safety regulation it was also intended for the protection of forward t rucks and t hose trucks following, as well aa the drivers and passengers therein. It should be noted that, unlike the Maryla.ru1 and other similar statutes in the oases we have mentioned, our section 304.017 (pro- viding that the driver of a vehicle shall not follow another vehicle more closely than is reasonably sate and prudent) by its ex- press terms is inapplicable to the drivers designated 1n section 304 .o44. Note the language with which section 304.017 opens and closes: 'The driver of a vehicle other than those destsfOted in section 304.044, R!AO, shill no ollow;t etc . *This sec- tion shall in no manner affect section 304.044, RSMo, relating to cU.stance between trucks travel~ng on the highway.' (Italics, the present writer ' s .) Therefore, if the sate and prudent following distance rule is applicable to dr1 ve .. •s designated in section 304.044, it 1s by virtue of a common law duty, and not under section 304.017." Turning now to Section 304.044.2. it is there provided that no truck or bus shall follow within three hundred feet of "another such vehicle. 11 The statute contains a proviso perulltting a ~ck or bus to pass "another similar vehicle . .. -3- Honorable William w. Hoertel It appears 6 therefore • that t he driver or a truck or bus is l~ted by the three hundred feet following distance only \then he is .following another truck or bus . The following distance requirement or Section 304.044.2 does not have ap- plication~ then. to the situation whero a truck or bus is following an automobile . Since t he driver of a truck or bus tollo\'Jing a vehicle ot her than another truck or bus is exempted from the follow- ing distance requirements or both Section 304.017 and Section 304.o44.2. he may not be charged with a crime tor the violation or either or t hese statutes under the facts which you set out. CONCLUSION It is, therefore~ our conclusion that t he driver ot a truck or bus may not be charged w1 th a crime tor the viola- tion or either Section 3~.017 or Section 3~.044.2 when following a vehicle other than another truck or bus . The foregoing opinion, which I hereby approve, was pre- pared by my Assistant • .Tames J. Murphy. JJM:ml Yours very truly • 'MOMAS P. EAGL!'J.iON Attorney General