Questions about charges following potentially illegal traffic stop and search

[bfipa]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Idaho
I apologize for the cross-post, but this is an urgent matter and could fall under either of 2 forum topics.
Hello.

I was recently pulled over. The officer conducting the traffic stop informed me his reason for stopping me was that I had snow covering my rear window (Which is completely unavoidable, since the aerodynamics of my car constantly deposit snow and ice on the rear window). The relevant law (Idaho statute 49-943 (1)) reads exactly: "No
person shall drive any motor vehicle with any sign, poster, or other
nontransparent material upon the front windshield, side wings, or side or rear
windows of the vehicle which obstructs the driver's clear view of the highway
or any intersecting highway."

Now, my layman's interpretation is that the qualifying phrase in this statute is "...which obstructs the driver's clear view..." My vehicle has side mirrors which give a view of the front corners of a passenger vehicle only 2-3 feet from the rear bumper and the reflection extends straight back to the horizon. In fact, the view from the side mirrors is more thorough than the view from the center rear-view mirror. Therefore, I do not believe the officer was legally allowed to stop me, since I had committed no other traffic violation. Does this constitute an illegal stop?

In addition, I was charged with 2 marijuana-related misdemeanors as a result of the officer's search of my person (which I did not consent to) while I was still inside the vehicle following this potentially illegal traffic stop. Am I correct in thinking these will be dismissed if the stop is found to be illegal?

I was not intoxicated, and I was placed under arrest (without being informed of my miranda rights) after successfully passing a field sobriety test. When I got in the back of the car, I noticed the display for the dash-mounted camera stated that the hard drive was full and the camera was not recording. What impact, if any, would this have on the judicial proceedings? There were no witnesses for the search except for the officer and myself, and the officer called another unit after he had already conducted the (illegal?) search. So it seems as if it's his word against mine, since the car's camera was not recording. I will be consulting a public defender, but I understand they more often than not encourage defendants to enter a guilty plea for a reduced penalty so I need to become fully informed of the relevant laws. Pleading guilty is not an option, since a drug-related conviction would put my entire career in jeopardy, as I have not finished school and will be relying on financial aid, which would become unavailable with a drug-related charge.

My court date for the misdemeanor charges was set before standard business hours on the first business day following my arrest. I am not clear on when I have the right to have an attorney present. I will, of course, appear in court, but due to the scheduling, I forsee a chance of being unable to speak with a public defender before/during the proceeding. If this ends up happening, will the court date be rescheduled? Will I be legally required to enter a plea or say anything before having an attorney appointed for me?

Any input/advice would be greatly appreciated. Please respond as soon as possible, as my court date is in the immediate future and I am struggling to prepare myself.

-bfipa

[Blue Meanie]

Was it snowing out during the stop and if it was, how hard was it snowing? What type of car were you driving?

[bfipa]

It was snowing very lightly when I was stopped, but it was very cold and there was dry, powdery snow on the road. The snow was picked up and deposited on my rear window as I drove, and due to the temperature, it froze to the window so that the rear wiper blade could not remove it.

Am I correct in my interpretation of the statute I quoted? To rephrase, does this statute mean it is only illegal to have a nontransparent material on the rear window if it obstructs my view of the road? I could plainly see the road behind me through my side-mounted rear-facing mirrors.

[cyjeff]

The statute plainly states "rear view window". Therefore, the stop was, from your posting, legal.

When you go to court, plead not guilty and ask for a public defender.

[FlyingRon]

I would guess that you were probably guilty of the rear window violation, but even if you weren't, it's still a legal stop. It's not beyond all reasonable doubt that a violation existed, just probable cause. Having the window coated so to appear opaque is good enough.

The lack of video means squat.

Miranda rights apply to only questioning after you are arrested.

You always have the right to an attorney. Get one now.

[Ozark_Sophist]

The relevant law (Idaho statute 49-943 (1)) reads exactly: "No
person shall drive any motor vehicle with any sign, poster, or other
nontransparent material upon the front windshield, side wings, or side or rear
windows of the vehicle which obstructs the driver's clear view of the highway
or any intersecting highway."

The stop, the search, and the lack of Miranda is all legal and proper. Your rear window was obstructed; the stop was legal. Even if the snow accumulated during operation of the vehicle due to snowfall or your failure to remove snow accumulation from the roof of the vehicle prior to operation, it is your responsibility as the driver to keep the window clear--even if it means stopping and manually removing the snow.

The stop is legitimate and legal. The search is legal, and evidence found during the search is admissable even if recording is not available.

Miranda is only necessary for statements made during custodial questioning to be admissable in court.

Plead not guilty at the hearing and request a public defender be appointed to you.

[outonbail]

Did you see the officer as soon as he got behind you? Did he say to you, "I've been trying to get you to stop for three miles now but because of that snow on your window you couldn't see me"?

While your interpretation of the code appears correct, the stop may be legal if the officer believed you were in violation, even if you weren't.

You will really need an attorney to sort this out for you.

You will also need to see what the officer writes in his report before you know how to approach your defense. So you're jumping the gun a little as far as needing a viable defense for your first court appearance.
You will only be pleading guilty or not guilty on this first court date.

Why did the officer search you and your vehicle to begin with? It certainly doesn't require a search of your vehicle to discover evidence of a covered window offense.
Did you give him permission to search your vehicle?

I wouldn't put too much confidence in the dash camera not recording. For one thing you don't know when it stopped, you just believe it wasn't recording when you were placed in the car, subsequent to your arrest.

So I don't know what your asking when you say your word against his, but if you start lying because you believe the officer doesn't have video, you will probably shoot yourself in the foot for doing so.

The police have gotten by without video for decades, so just because some have it available today, doesn't make it a requirement or stack the odds for you're beating the charge.

Let your attorney look at all the facts and go with his/her advice