Follow Us

Facebooktwitterrss
≡ Menu

Traffic Stop – Air Freshener

State v. Cathy Ann Currie, 2011AP322-CR, District 3, 7/19/11

court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Currie: Jon Stanek; case activity

¶7        Lear testified he stopped Currie because he observed “a very large air freshener” hanging from her rearview mirror.  The court determined that any object hanging from a rearview mirror would obstruct a driver’s clear view through the front of the windshield.  The court also found Lear’s testimony about his observations credible.  See State v. McCallum, 208 Wis. 2d 463, 488, 561 N.W.2d 707 (1997) (Credibility determinations are for the trial court.).

¶8        We determine “a very large air freshener” hanging from the rearview mirror obstructs a driver’s clear view through the front windshield.  We conclude when Lear observed the air freshener, he had probable cause to believe Currie had violated Wis. Stat. § 346.88(3)(b).  Lear conducted a valid traffic stop on Currie’s vehicle.

 

Facebooktwitterlinkedinmail
{ 0 comments… add one }

Leave a Comment