(No reasonable suspicion of a crime justifying a car stop for obscured state name on license plate)
SYLLABUS BY THE COURT
I try not to get into the weeds when alerting law enforcement about important decisions of our appellate courts. Instead, I attempt to only pass along the information necessary for officers to be aware of changes that will affect their day-to-day activities. However, now and then a case comes along that is so confusing that a few extra paragraphs are necessary. This is one of those cases.
I fully admit that I am not the sharpest knife in the drawer. I must also admit that I just do not understand how the justices found zero statutory support for the requirement that a license plate have a state name on it, and that the state name (being a required part of such license plate) has to be clearly visible, be free from foreign materials, and be clearly legible.
Unlike most summaries, I have attached here a copy of the opinion. See pages 10 and 11 for the Court’s reasoning. After a somewhat contorted journey through state and federal case law, K.S.A. 8-147, 8-1,141, 8-132(a), and 8-133, the opinion found itself discussing easily read letters and numerals, and apparently conflating license plates with registration decals.
My confusion probably comes from why any of that journey was necessary. When faced with interpretation issues, courts turn to what is called statutory construction canons. One canon is to read statutes in pari materia which means that "[i]n construing statutes and determining legislative intent, several provisions of an act or acts . . . must be construed together with a view of reconciling and bringing them into workable harmony if possible." Courts have a duty "to reconcile the different provisions so as to make them consistent, harmonious, and sensible."
In that vein, see the following statutes concerning the license plate issue:
8-126a. Whenever in this act or in any other law of this state relating to registration of motor vehicles any of the following words or terms are used: 1. Number plate or plates. 2. License number plates. 3. License number plate. 4. Number plate. 5. Number plates. 6. Registration number plate. 7. License tags. 8. Tags; or any other word, term or phrase of similar import or meaning is used in any such law, the same shall be construed to mean and include any plate, tag, token, marker or sign issued under the provisions of this act for the purpose of identifying vehicles registered under the provisions of the motor-vehicle registration laws of this state or otherwise carrying out the provisions of such laws.
8-132. (a) Subject to the provisions of this section and K.S.A. 8-1,125, and amendments thereto, the division of vehicles shall furnish to every owner whose vehicle shall be registered one license plate for such vehicle. Such license plate shall have displayed on it the registration number assigned to the vehicle and to the owner thereof, the name of the state, which may be abbreviated, and the year or years for which it is issued.The same type of license plates shall be issued for passenger motor vehicles, rented without a driver, as are issued for private passenger vehicles.
8-133.
. . .
(c) Every license plate shall at all times be securely fastened to the vehicle to which it is assigned, to prevent the plate from swinging, and at a height not less than 12 inches from the ground, measuring from the bottom of such plate. The license plate shall be fastened in a place and position to be clearly visible, and shall be maintained free from foreign materials and in a condition to be clearly legible.
I just cannot see how those three statutes, when taken together, do not require license plates to have a state name, and that such state name be both clearly visible and clearly legible.
After reading the opinion many times, I remain in the camp of every state and federal judge in Kansas who has for 42 years thought those statutes were pretty clear as to the intent of the Kansas Legislature.
That all said, please record my dissent.
Colin
