STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. BRYANT I. THOMPSON (12-01-0061, CUMBERLAND COUNTY AND STATEWIDE), A-5318-14T1

Background

On Sept. 22, 2011, an officer observed defendant Bryant Thompson’s vehicle and believed its center (third) brake light was not working; he also saw an object hanging from the rearview mirror.
The officer stopped the car, approached the driver, and observed Thompson reach toward his right pocket; the officer then saw a plastic bag of suspected marijuana in Thompson’s lap and arrested him.
A search incident to arrest produced cocaine in Thompson’s jeans. Thompson moved to suppress, arguing the stop was unlawful.
At the suppression hearing the judge credited the officer’s account over Thompson’s about where the marijuana was and relied on the plain view doctrine to deny suppression.
Thompson appealed, arguing the stop lacked reasonable suspicion because, in 2011, N.J.S.A. 39:3-61(a) required only two functioning stop lamps and the officer’s belief that three were required was an unreasonable mistake of law; alternatively the object on the mirror did not unduly obstruct vision and the community-caretaking exception did not apply.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the stop was supported by reasonable suspicion when premised on a broken center brake light	Officer reasonably believed N.J.S.A. 39:3-66 required all required lamps be in working order, so seeing the center light out justified the stop	N.J.S.A. 39:3-61(a) (2011) unambiguously required only two rear stop lamps; the officer’s belief that a third was required was an unreasonable mistake of law	Stop invalid; statutes unambiguous that only two rear stop lamps were required in 2011, so officer’s interpretation was not objectively reasonable and cannot supply reasonable suspicion
Whether Heien’s reasonable-mistake-of-law rule saves the stop	Heien permits a stop based on an objectively reasonable mistake of law	Officer’s reading of the statutes was not objectively reasonable because the statutory scheme was clear	Heien inapplicable because the officer’s mistake was unreasonable under the clear statutory text
Whether the object hanging from the rearview mirror provided reasonable suspicion under N.J.S.A. 39:3-74	Object hanging from mirror justified stop as obstructing vision	Object (air freshener or handicap placard) did not unduly interfere and officer gave no articulable facts of obstruction	No reasonable suspicion from mirror object; State failed to show articulable facts of vision interference
Whether the community-caretaking exception justified the stop	Officer could have been performing a welfare check given a nonfunctional light	Stop was for law enforcement purposes, no evidence of driver impairment or emergency	Community-caretaking exception does not apply; no emergency or safety threat shown

Key Cases Cited

State v. Puzio, 379 N.J. Super. 378 (App. Div. 2005) (officer’s wholly erroneous statutory reading cannot justify a stop)
Heien v. North Carolina, 135 S. Ct. 530 (U.S. 2014) (Fourth Amendment allows stops based on objectively reasonable mistakes of law)
State v. Scriven, 226 N.J. 20 (N.J. 2016) (officer’s unreasonable mistake of law invalidated car stop; reaffirmed Puzio’s continued vitality)
Cady v. Dombrowski, 413 U.S. 433 (U.S. 1973) (community caretaking doctrine described as narrow exception supporting certain vehicle stops/searches)
State v. Barrow, 408 N.J. Super. 509 (App. Div. 2009) (officer must articulate facts showing an object hanging from a mirror unduly interfered with driver’s vision)