North Dakota Supreme Court Rules No Out-of-State Temp Registration on Vehicles
One of the most fundamental civil rights granted in the Bill of Rights is the right for a United States citizen to be secure against unreasonable searches and seizures (it's the fourth, more accurately). However, like all the other constitutional amendments protecting citizens, interpretation of the term "unreasonable" in "unreasonable search and seizure" is largely dependent on the particular instance in question.
The question of when police have a reasonable suspicion to stop someone has long been the subject of debate, from questions of racial profiling all the way to unlawful search and seizure. A recent Supreme Court decision in the state of North Dakota makes one class of driver - a driver with a temporary registration plate from another state - exposed to being stopped by law enforcement.
The decision by the Supreme Court came down in favor of a Grand Forks, North Dakota police officer that stopped Clinton Mitchell on October 1, 2006 for driving with a temporary registration tag from the state of Montana. Mitchell's objection to the police stop, which he continued to appeal up to the Supreme Court, was that he was stopped on the basis of his temporary tag even though the tag was valid.
According to the lawsuit that Mitchell filed (available at this site as a download), officers pulled him over because of his Montana temporary registration tag, which was prominently displayed as a white sheet of paper on his rear window with the expiration date in clear, bold letters. This format is distinct from the temporary registration tag used in North Dakota, which is smaller.
Police report that officers questioned Mitchell, and eventually arrested him for driving under the influence of alcohol. Mitchell's lawsuit doesn't question the legitimacy of his DUI arrest, per se, but does question the right of the police officer to stop him for reasonable suspicion based on just his out-of-state temporary registration.
A lower court had previously ruled that the officer was justified in his stop because of his unfamiliarity with Montana's temporary registration form.
In the Supreme Court majority decision, Justice Mary Muehlen Maring wrote, "We hold that this 8 1/2 x 11 sheet of paper in the rear window of Mitchell's vehicle, which was without license plates, provided reasonable and articulable suspicion that Mitchell was not complying with motor vehicle registration laws."
All justices except one were in favor of the officer. The lone dissenting justice indicated that he could not support the decision, expressing that he was "concerned that this is a dangerous precedent to set."
However, the Supreme Court's decision extends further than just the officer's ability to stop a motorist with temporary tags from another state, but makes that very act illegal. The majority decision included the startling sentiment that "the law does not establish that the appellant was entitled to operate his vehicle in North Dakota with a valid Montana temporary registration certificate."
The regulations governing vehicle registration are some of the most widely varying from state to state. As a result, you should be well aware of the regulations governing temporary registration notice both in your own state and any neighboring state in which you intend to drive. In this case, the North Dakota Supreme Court's decision will have immediate ramifications for drivers in the state, especially if they are visiting the state from another state.
