State v. Richard E. Houghton, Jr.
868 N.W.2d 143
Wis.2015Background
- Officer Jeff Price stopped Richard Houghton after seeing a car with no front license plate and an air freshener and GPS visible in the front windshield.
- On approach, Officer Price smelled marijuana, searched the car, and found ~240 grams of marijuana and packaging/scale consistent with distribution.
- Houghton moved to suppress the evidence, arguing the stop was unlawful because the observed windshield items and missing front plate did not violate Wisconsin law.
- The circuit court denied suppression; Houghton pleaded guilty and appealed. The court of appeals reversed, finding no probable cause for a § 346.88(3)(b) violation.
- The Wisconsin Supreme Court granted review, considered U.S. Supreme Court precedent (Heien), and ultimately reversed the court of appeals, upholding the stop as supported by reasonable suspicion based on an objectively reasonable mistake of law.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Houghton) | Defendant's Argument (State / Officer) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standard required to initiate a traffic stop | Missing: stops for observed violations require probable cause; this was not met | Reasonable suspicion suffices to initiate any traffic stop | Reasonable suspicion that a traffic law is or was violated suffices to initiate a stop |
| Whether an officer’s reasonable mistake of law can support reasonable suspicion | Officer’s mistake cannot justify a seizure; prior WI precedent bars it | Under Heien, an objectively reasonable mistake of law can supply reasonable suspicion | Adopted Heien: an objectively reasonable mistake of law may form the basis for reasonable suspicion |
| Interpretation of Wis. Stat. § 346.88(3)(a)–(b) (windshield obstruction) | The statute does not prohibit minor items like air fresheners or small GPS units | Officer reasonably interpreted the statute to bar objects in windshield, supporting suspicion | § 346.88(3)(a) does not absolutely ban all objects; § 346.88(3)(b) requires a material obstruction, but the officer’s contrary reading was objectively reasonable here |
| Legality of stopping for missing front license plate | No probable cause: many out-of-state cars lack front plates; officer lacked basis | Officer believed absence of front plate violated law | Officer’s belief re: plate requirement was unreasonable here; lack of front plate alone did not supply reasonable suspicion |
Key Cases Cited
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (Terry stop / reasonable suspicion standard)
- Berkemer v. McCarty, 468 U.S. 420 (applies Terry principles to traffic stops)
- Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806 (probable cause not required to avoid pretext concerns; traffic stops reasonable when based on traffic-law belief)
- Heien v. North Carolina, 135 S. Ct. 530 (2014) (an objectively reasonable mistake of law can supply reasonable suspicion)
- State v. Brown, 355 Wis. 2d 668 (2014) (Wisconsin precedent holding mistakes of law cannot support stops; overruled to the extent inconsistent with Heien)
- State v. Longcore, 226 Wis. 2d 1 (Ct. App. 1999) (earlier Wisconsin rule that lawful stop cannot be predicated on mistake of law; limited by this decision)