ABOUT THAT WINDOW TINT

     


It looks cool.  It gives you added privacy, as you can see "out" but they can't see "in."

It is window-tinted auto glass.  Many cars come with factory-installed tinted windows.  Almost all cars today have a six-inch strip at the top of their windshield that is tinted to reduce glare. There is an added bonus to tinted glass if you support your local law enforcement: it attracts police.

Police on patrol are generally on the alert for red flags that indicate a vehicle is carrying illegal drugs.  At the top of the list is excessive window tint.  

State legislatures do not like the ability of drivers to conceal what is inside the cab area of their vehicles.  For this reason, states have enacted "window-tint laws" that disallow a certain level of darkness in window tint.  In Idaho, a vehicle's front side windows must allow more than 35% of light in.  The back side windows must allow more than 20% of light in, and the rear window must allow more than 35% of light in.  Auto glass and auto repair shops generally have a hand-held device that checks for proper window tint.

I have represented a lot of people who have been stopped for allegedly having excessive (too dark) window tint.  Police officers are constitutionally allowed to stop a car suspected of carrying drugs if they can find some reasonable basis to suspect the vehicle driver is committing a law violation of some sort. If they stop a vehicle for excessive window tint, they generally could care less about dark windows. They want to search the car for contraband.  

I will say more about the legality of the stop for window tint and other infractions in a later blog, but the purpose of this blog is to let you know if you have dark windows, you will be stopped again and again by police who are wondering if you are hiding contraband in your car.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

7 Things Lawyers Can't Tell Jurors

Image
 It is a trial lawyer's job to educate jurors, and tell them what they need to know in order to decide cases. Despite this, there are many things, true things, that lawyers are not allowed to tell jurors directly in statements to the jury or indirectly through testimony of their witnesses. Lawyers know these things, though, and I thought you might like to know some of things. #1. A lawyer can't tell the jurors anything that happened during settlement negotiations. He cannot let the jurors know, when asking them to make the defendant pay his client $100,000 that the defendant agreed to pay him $80,000 prior to the trial. The reason for this is that you want settlement negotiations to be very open. You don't want to damage a negotiation session because someone is afraid that what they say will get repeated to a jury if you don't strike a deal. #2 In Idaho, a lawyer can't tell the jurors that the defendant has insurance. In many other states, he can. Bec
Read more

Man Framed by Prosecutor Released After 29 Years in Prison Seeking Lawsuit

Image
19 year old, Charise Kamps, was found raped and strangled to death in her apartment in June 1980. Ralph Armstrong told the police that both of them were at the apartment alone doing cocaine before leaving to go see friends around 9:30 pm. Police said that they learned that Armstrong owed Kamp's boyfriend $400 and witnesses saw Armstrong handing Kamps money that night. However, the money was not found in the apartment, and Armstrong deposited $315 in his bank the next day.The defense argued that he got the money from his brother. One of the neighbors saw a lean, muscular man about 5 feet 5 inches tall with long, dark hair drive up to the apartment. Before the identification process, the police had the witness hypnotized. He was shown a photograph of Armstrong, and After being hypnotized, the witness changed the height of the man he saw. Later at a lineup to have the witness select the man he saw, he chose Armstrong. The other people in the lineup were police officers in wigs
Read more

Tuesday Tip: Reid Interrogation Technique

Image
Various methods have been used in police interrogations to elicit a confession. By far the most popular method used for over seventy years is the Reid Technique. This interrogation method assumes guilty suspects can be identified from certain behavioral cues. It is said to be proven as highly effective at getting confessions; however, there has been criticism about it for many years because it has been linked to many wrongful convictions.  Around 25 percent of post conviction DNA exonerations have been associated with a false confession from authorities using the Reid Technique. Even one of the first cases in which John Reid used this technique turned out to be a false confession. More and more scientists and scholars are saying this approach is based on outdated psychology. There are several components incorporated in this technique, including room design and how the investigator conducts the interview. There are three spatial zones the investigators use, which can be seen in
Read more