STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
JERMAINE D. ENGLISH, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that a temporary obstruction of a license plate, even if momentarily readable, violates the statute requiring the plate to be plainly visible at all times, thus justifying a traffic stop.
[1] A traffic stop is valid if officers have a founded suspicion that the driver or vehicle is violating a traffic ordinance or statute.
[2] Under Florida law, license plates must be displayed in a manner that prevents swinging and all letters, numerals, and other identification marks must be plainly visible a…
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePolice officers stopped a vehicle because the tag light and attached wires obstructed the view of the license plate, rendering it unreadable. Although…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Plain Reading Of Statute cases and more on FLexlaw
The State of Florida appeals an order granting Jermaine D. English’s motion to suppress. We reverse.
The facts are not in dispute. English was stopped by two Orlando police officers after they noticed that the tag light on the vehicle that he was driving, along with its attached wires, was hanging down in front of the license plate, obstructing the officers’ view of the plate and rendering at least one letter on it unreadable. The tag became readable, only momentarily, when the vehicle turned and caused the wires to shift. However, after the turn, when the wires shifted back, the view of the tag was obstructed again.
Based on the single fact that the tag became unobstructed temporarily during a turn, the trial court granted English’s motion to suppress, concluding:
Under the other — under obstruction, there’s a case ... saying that once you are able to read the actual numbers, that it’s no longer a violation. So even if you get out of your car and walk to the car, as soon as you can see the numbers, then that satisfies your need for your probable cause. So with that, I am going to grant the suppression.
This was error.1
“All that is required for a valid vehicle stop is a founded suspicion by the *530officer that the driver of the car, or the vehicle itself, is in violation of a traffic ordinance or statute.” Davis v. State, 788 So.2d 308, 309 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001). Section 316.605(1), Florida Statutes, provides in pertinent part:
Every vehicle, at all times while driven, stopped, or parked upon any highways, roads, or streets of this state ... shall, ... display the license plate ... in such manner as to prevent the plates from swinging, and all letters, numerals, printing, writing, and other identification marks upon the plates regarding the word “Florida,” the registration decal, and the alphanumeric designation shall be clear and distinct and free from defacement, mutilation, grease, and other obscuring matter, so that they will be plainly visible and legible at all times 100 feet from the rear or front. ... A violation of this subsection is a noncriminal traffic infraction, punishable as a nonmoving violation as provided in chapter 318.
§ 316.605(1), Fla. Stat. (emphasis added). Based on the plain reading of the statute, the alphanumeric designation on the license plate must be plainly visible at all times. Here, according to the testimony of the officers, which the trial court found reliable, English’s tag was not in compliance with the statute. As such, the officers had the authority to conduct a traffic stop in this case. See Wright v. State, 471 So.2d 155, 156-57 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985) (finding that officer charged with enforcing motor vehicle laws had the duty and authority to investigate why a vehicle that was parked in the roadway had its license tag partially obscured with a dirty rag, in violation of the law). But see Harris v. State, 11 So.3d 462, 463-64 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) (finding that police officers who were unable to read defendant’s license plate because of a trailer hitch properly attached to the vehicle lacked authority to perform a traffic stop, because matters external to the tag, such as trailer hitches, bicycle racks, handicap chairs, u-hauls, and the like were not “other obscuring matter”).
Because we conclude that English’s vehicle was properly stopped pursuant to a violation of section 316.605(1), we reverse the order of the trial court and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
PALMER and LAWSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
English v. State, 191 So. 3d 448 (Fla. 2016)…LABARGA, C.J. Jermaine English seeks review of the decision of the Fifth District Court of-Appeal in State v. English, 148 So. 3d 529 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014), on the ground that it expressly and directly conflicts with a decision of another district court of appeal, Harris v. State, 11 So. 3d 462 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009), on a question of law. Specifically, the district courts reached confl…
-
Baker v. State, 164 So. 3d 151 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015)…other than the trailer hitch obscured the tag, the trial court denied Appellant’s motion to suppress based upon Carter and the inevitable discovery doctrine. While this appeal was pending, the Fifth District issued its opinion in State v. English, 148 So. 3d 529 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014). There, the court held that an officer had the authority to conduct a traffic stop under the plain reading of section 316.605, Florida Statutes, where the alphanumeric designation was obstructed by the license tag’s light and att…1 / 2
-
Munroe v. State, 177 So. 3d 320 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015)…not be obstructed by any matter.” Id. at 151, 155 (noting that “the statutory catchall phrase ‘other obscuring matter’ does not distinguish from obscuring matter ‘on’ the license tag versus external matter obscuring the tag”); see State v. English, 148 So. 3d 529, 529-30 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014) (holding that, under the plain reading of section 316.605(1), an officer had the authority to stop a vehicle where the license tag’s alphanumeric designation was obstructed by a hanging tag light and its attached wires),…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Diaz, 850 So. 2d 435 (Fla. 2003)
- Davis v. State, 788 So. 2d 308 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001)
- Wright v. State, 471 So. 2d 155 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)
- Shombie S. Harris v. State, 11 So. 3d 462 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009)