Obstruction of plate
- Thread starter Blown 330
- Start date
That is BS.
STG
Banned
Despite your rather inept use of the English language, I have decided to help clarify the fact that you are shit out of luck.
Here is something I found on barpostlaw.com:
"Watch Your License Plates
We recently represented a long-time client in municipal court for a speeding ticket and for an “unclear” license plate violation. Because of the circumstances of the case, we thought the second ticket was “piling on” and defensible, but after we researched the issue we believe that a large percentage of New Jersey motorists may be susceptible to motor vehicle charges based upon their license plates.
Here are the facts. The client’s rear license plate was bordered by a license plate frame or holder installed by the dealer. Most of the license plate was visible, except for about ¼ of an inch of the words “Garden State” found at the bottom of the plate was blocked by the frame. However, the phrase was perfectly legible from any point of view; only a small part of it is covered.
That ¼ inch was a violation under N.J.S.A 39:3-33 which generally requires that “[a]ll identification marks shall be kept clear and distinct and free from grease, dust or other blurring matter, so as to be plainly visible at all times of the day and night.”
However, the statute then goes on to deal with the issue of license plate frames and holders and directs that:
No person shall drive a motor vehicle which has a license plate frame or identification mark holder that conceals or otherwise obscures any part of any marking imprinted upon the vehicle’s registration [license] plate or any part of any insert which the director … issues to be inserted in and attached to that registration plate or marker.
So, our client violated the statute because the bottom portion of the license plate frame “concealed” or “obscured” the imprinted marking “The Garden State” even though the identifying information was completely legible!
Additionally, there is an Appellate Division case, In the interest of D.K., 360 N.J. Super. 49 (App. Div. 2003) that held that a partially obscured license plate is a violation of N.J.S.A. 39:3-77, a statute that prohibits the use of a part or accessory that changes the designed performance of approved equipment such a license plate. In support of this contention the court referred to N.J.S.A. 39:3-33.9 which sets standards, including visibility, for license plates.
The specific issue in the D.K. case was whether a police officer had probable cause to stop a vehicle with a tinted plastic license plate cover. In finding that the officer had a good faith basis for issuing a ticket for N.J.S.A. 39:3-77 the court pointed out that the Motor Vehicle Commission’s inspection regulations specifically state that a license plate shall not be covered by glass, plastic or similar materials. The court inferred that regulation was issued “specifically to address the need for license plate legibility in policing activities and … at toll barriers employing scanning and photographic devices.”
So there you have it. License plate holders that “obscure” any portion of the “imprinted” portion of your license or license plate covers of any stripe may result in one or more tickets and will provide the probable cause for a motor vehicle stop that could lead to other charges. Be forewarned and take a look at your car to see if you are asking for trouble."
I prefer frames without built-in probable cause. I also have superb taste:
Here is something I found on barpostlaw.com:
"Watch Your License Plates
We recently represented a long-time client in municipal court for a speeding ticket and for an “unclear” license plate violation. Because of the circumstances of the case, we thought the second ticket was “piling on” and defensible, but after we researched the issue we believe that a large percentage of New Jersey motorists may be susceptible to motor vehicle charges based upon their license plates.
Here are the facts. The client’s rear license plate was bordered by a license plate frame or holder installed by the dealer. Most of the license plate was visible, except for about ¼ of an inch of the words “Garden State” found at the bottom of the plate was blocked by the frame. However, the phrase was perfectly legible from any point of view; only a small part of it is covered.
That ¼ inch was a violation under N.J.S.A 39:3-33 which generally requires that “[a]ll identification marks shall be kept clear and distinct and free from grease, dust or other blurring matter, so as to be plainly visible at all times of the day and night.”
However, the statute then goes on to deal with the issue of license plate frames and holders and directs that:
No person shall drive a motor vehicle which has a license plate frame or identification mark holder that conceals or otherwise obscures any part of any marking imprinted upon the vehicle’s registration [license] plate or any part of any insert which the director … issues to be inserted in and attached to that registration plate or marker.
So, our client violated the statute because the bottom portion of the license plate frame “concealed” or “obscured” the imprinted marking “The Garden State” even though the identifying information was completely legible!
Additionally, there is an Appellate Division case, In the interest of D.K., 360 N.J. Super. 49 (App. Div. 2003) that held that a partially obscured license plate is a violation of N.J.S.A. 39:3-77, a statute that prohibits the use of a part or accessory that changes the designed performance of approved equipment such a license plate. In support of this contention the court referred to N.J.S.A. 39:3-33.9 which sets standards, including visibility, for license plates.
The specific issue in the D.K. case was whether a police officer had probable cause to stop a vehicle with a tinted plastic license plate cover. In finding that the officer had a good faith basis for issuing a ticket for N.J.S.A. 39:3-77 the court pointed out that the Motor Vehicle Commission’s inspection regulations specifically state that a license plate shall not be covered by glass, plastic or similar materials. The court inferred that regulation was issued “specifically to address the need for license plate legibility in policing activities and … at toll barriers employing scanning and photographic devices.”
So there you have it. License plate holders that “obscure” any portion of the “imprinted” portion of your license or license plate covers of any stripe may result in one or more tickets and will provide the probable cause for a motor vehicle stop that could lead to other charges. Be forewarned and take a look at your car to see if you are asking for trouble."
I prefer frames without built-in probable cause. I also have superb taste:
Last edited:
Thanks for the info, I really never knew. I just realized one thing, would plate frames effect inspection? Because I just had a car inspected and passed with the exact same frames. I also know that the cop was looking for any ticket he could give ( got a total of 4, all equipment violations), I have had these frames on since 2000 and never once got a ticket but have been pulled over and ticketed for other things
STG
Banned
Last edited:
I think you can get that thrown out. Say the dealership put it on the car, you just passed inspection, been on the car for 8 years, and bring that picture.
STG
Banned
*removed by moderator - this is not smackdown*
Last edited:
N.J.S.A. 39:3-33 said:
NJ law is clear, there are a few cases in this same area of law that finds that a driver may not obscure any part of the license plate.
It just goes to show you that laws can vary dramatically from state to state. In Orange County, Florida, judge Whitehead ruled that a license plate frame that does not obscure the actual numbers on the plate is not probable cause for a motor vehicle stop. He stated that because the "county" is obscured does not prevent the license plate number from being identified and run.
Sorry, but this is a loser. It doesnt matter that you passed inspection, as NJ inspection is regulatory and not Law Enforcement. Ultimately, you are responsible for your vehicle.
Oh I must have forgot, every judge follows the laws to a T.
OP fight that, I think you have a good chance of beating it.
Last edited:
Although, judges have some discretion, the appellate court of NJ left lower court judges with no discretion in this matter. Based on the case law that exist now in NJ, he has no chance.
whats the point in fighting it? yes its illegal, go to court and probably lose and then pay another $35 court fee. and even if you win your still paying a court fee. big deal. just pay the ticket and take the frame off.
All tickets do not require a court appearance. Only tickets which are criminal charges require a court appearance and those designated by statute. If the ticket isnt marked "mandatory appearance" than it is not.
I think it is crazy. Obscuring the word "Garden State," does not effect the purpose of the license plate, nor does it impact the ability of L.E. Like I said, Florida case law holds just the opposite, that to be considered obscured the plate number must be covered, not ancillary wording.
All 4 tickets are marked as such....I am apparently a "chronic" offender.
What are the other three tickets for?
Tinted windows, No front plate, and obstruction of view.
So correcting the problem has no effect other than preventing future citations? A lot of people complain about VA's traffic courts but at least if you correct the problem and bring proof to court, the judge has the power to dismiss the charges.
Users who are viewing this thread
