Identify distraction and mobile device evidence

By Jacob Alford

A device present in a vehicle is not proof it distracted the driver. Identify the activity, timing and evidence connecting it to lost observation or control. Calls, texting, other device use, distraction inside the vehicle and distraction outside it have distinct factor labels. Obtain records lawfully and preserve context; do not access someone else’s phone or account.

Questions this group helps answer:

• How are distraction in the vehicle and driver inattention different?
• Can hands-free use contribute?
• How are talking, texting, other use and unknown use coded?
• Does a phone factor automatically prove a texting-law violation?
• What can phone records show and what can they not show?

19. Distraction in vehicle

Meaning in the report: Something the driver or another occupant did caused a loss of observation or vehicle control that contributed to the crash.

What needs explaining: Explain the distraction in the narrative. The manual examples include swatting a bee or a dog getting underfoot. What specific activity or event diverted attention, and what evidence links it to the collision?

Limits and qualifications: Do not infer this factor solely because an occupant, animal or distracting object was present.

Sources: TxDOT definition, page 137.

Further care: The distracting activity and causal effect need evidence. A distraction factor does not itself identify a particular offense.

20. Driver inattention

Meaning in the report: A lack of attention to the road or traffic contributed to the crash.

What needs explaining: Explain the inattentive behavior in the narrative; manual examples include eating, applying makeup and adjusting the radio. What should have been observed, for how long, and what supports the conclusion that the driver missed it?

Limits and qualifications: A collision alone is not proof of a specific distraction. Separate a supported attention failure from speculation about its cause.

Sources: TxDOT definition, page 137.

Further care: Do not equate the ordinary activity alone with a law violation or with proof it caused the crash.

74. Cell or mobile device use talking

Meaning in the report: Talking through or handling a mobile device impaired observation or control enough to contribute.

What needs explaining: The manual includes hands-free use. Identify the talking activity and causal connection. What evidence shows a conversation and how did it affect the driving task?

Limits and qualifications: Hands-free can still be a crash factor even when no particular device-use offense is established.

Coding note and related law: Talking, including hands-free, contributes through loss of observation or control. No statute is cited by the manual.

Sources: TxDOT definition, page 142; Transportation §545.4251(a)–(d),(j) (related provision); Transportation §545.424(a),(b),(f) (related provision); Transportation §545.425(a)–(f) (related provision); Transportation §545.4252(a)–(e) (related provision).

Further care: The manual cites no law and includes hands-free use. A causal distraction factor is not automatically an illegal-device-use finding. Section 545.4251(b) prohibits reading/writing/sending an electronic message while operating unless stopped; (c) supplies hands-free, navigation, emergency and other affirmative defenses; (d) gives exceptions. Mere adult talking is not the conduct that subsection (b) describes. Separate rules apply to under-18 operators (§545.424(a), (f), including hands-free), school crossing zones, bus drivers with minor passengers (§545.425) and qualifying school property (§545.4252). Local and commercial-driver rules require fact-specific review.

75. Cell or mobile device use texting

Meaning in the report: Texting through or handling a mobile device impaired observation or control enough to contribute.

What needs explaining: The manual includes hands-free use, while the legal texting offense has its own elements and defenses. What evidence establishes texting at the relevant time, and was the vehicle stopped or moving?

Limits and qualifications: The report code and the statute are not identical. Do not equate every code 75 finding with a proven texting conviction.

Coding note and related law: Texting, including hands-free, contributes through loss of observation or control. No statute is cited by the manual.

Sources: TxDOT definition, page 142; Transportation §545.4251(a)–(d),(j) (related provision); Transportation §545.424(a),(b),(f) (related provision); Transportation §545.425(a)–(f) (related provision); Transportation §545.4252(a)–(e) (related provision).

Further care: The manual cites no law and includes hands-free use. A causal distraction factor is not automatically an illegal-device-use finding. Section 545.4251(b) prohibits reading/writing/sending an electronic message while operating unless stopped; (c) supplies hands-free, navigation, emergency and other affirmative defenses; (d) gives exceptions. Mere adult talking is not the conduct that subsection (b) describes. Separate rules apply to under-18 operators (§545.424(a), (f), including hands-free), school crossing zones, bus drivers with minor passengers (§545.425) and qualifying school property (§545.4252). Local and commercial-driver rules require fact-specific review.

76. Cell or mobile device use other

Meaning in the report: Other mobile-device activity, such as internet use, gaming or emailing, impaired driving enough to contribute.

What needs explaining: Identify the actual activity where possible and explain its causal role. Was the driver using navigation, email, an app or another function, and what supports the timing?

Limits and qualifications: Different uses may fall within different statutory provisions or exceptions; the code is not a single offense.

Coding note and related law: Other device uses such as internet, games or email, including hands-free, contribute through loss of observation or control. No statute is cited by the manual.

Sources: TxDOT definition, page 142; Transportation §545.4251(a)–(d),(j) (related provision); Transportation §545.424(a),(b),(f) (related provision); Transportation §545.425(a)–(f) (related provision); Transportation §545.4252(a)–(e) (related provision).

Further care: The manual cites no law and includes hands-free use. A causal distraction factor is not automatically an illegal-device-use finding. Section 545.4251(b) prohibits reading/writing/sending an electronic message while operating unless stopped; (c) supplies hands-free, navigation, emergency and other affirmative defenses; (d) gives exceptions. Mere adult talking is not the conduct that subsection (b) describes. Separate rules apply to under-18 operators (§545.424(a), (f), including hands-free), school crossing zones, bus drivers with minor passengers (§545.425) and qualifying school property (§545.4252). Local and commercial-driver rules require fact-specific review. Email may satisfy the electronic-message definition; not every game, navigation function or internet use necessarily does. Evaluate actual use rather than the factor label.

77. Cell or mobile device use unknown

Meaning in the report: Mobile-device use contributed, but the purpose of use could not be determined.

What needs explaining: Unknown describes the activity, not permission to speculate that a device caused the crash. What establishes device use and causation even though its purpose remains uncertain?

Limits and qualifications: A phone being in the vehicle, or an unexplained screen record, does not by itself establish this factor.

Coding note and related law: The use is undetermined, including hands-free, but contributes through loss of observation or control. No statute is cited by the manual.

Sources: TxDOT definition, page 143; Transportation §545.4251(a)–(d),(j) (related provision); Transportation §545.424(a),(b),(f) (related provision); Transportation §545.425(a)–(f) (related provision); Transportation §545.4252(a)–(e) (related provision).

Further care: The manual cites no law and includes hands-free use. A causal distraction factor is not automatically an illegal-device-use finding. Section 545.4251(b) prohibits reading/writing/sending an electronic message while operating unless stopped; (c) supplies hands-free, navigation, emergency and other affirmative defenses; (d) gives exceptions. Mere adult talking is not the conduct that subsection (b) describes. Separate rules apply to under-18 operators (§545.424(a), (f), including hands-free), school crossing zones, bus drivers with minor passengers (§545.425) and qualifying school property (§545.4252). Local and commercial-driver rules require fact-specific review. Unknown use cannot by itself establish the electronic-message element of §545.4251.

Attorney reviewed by Jacob Alford · November 11, 2026