Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/19pdf/18-556_e1pf.pdf
Page Number: 3.0

Cite as:  589 U. S. ____ (2020) 

1 

Opinion of the Court 

NOTICE:  This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the 
preliminary  print  of  the  United  States  Reports.  Readers  are  requested  to 
notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of the United States, Wash-
ington, D. C. 20543, of any typographical or other formal errors, in order that 
corrections may be made before the preliminary print goes to press. 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

_________________ 

No. 18–556 
_________________ 

KANSAS, PETITIONER v. CHARLES GLOVER 

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF KANSAS 

[April 6, 2020]

 JUSTICE THOMAS delivered the opinion of the Court. 
This case presents the question whether a police officer 
violates the Fourth Amendment by initiating an investiga-
tive traffic stop after running a vehicle’s license plate and 
learning  that  the  registered  owner  has  a  revoked  driver’s 
license.  We  hold  that  when  the  officer  lacks  information 
negating  an  inference  that  the  owner  is  the  driver  of  the 
vehicle, the stop is reasonable. 

I 
Kansas  charged  respondent  Charles  Glover,  Jr.,  with
driving  as  a  habitual violator  after  a  traffic stop  revealed 
that he was driving with a revoked license.  See Kan. Stat. 
Ann. §8–285(a)(3) (2001).  Glover filed a motion to suppress 
all evidence seized during the stop, claiming that the officer 
lacked reasonable suspicion.  Neither Glover nor the police 
officer  testified  at  the  suppression  hearing.  Instead,  the 
parties stipulated to the following facts: 

“1. Deputy Mark Mehrer is a certified law enforcement 
officer employed by the Douglas County Kansas Sher-
iff ’s Office. 
2.  On  April  28,  2016,  Deputy  Mehrer  was  on  routine 
patrol  in  Douglas  County  when  he  observed  a  1995