Court Opinion

ID: 9718332
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 07:21:16.706435+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:23:58.610292
License: Public Domain

KIRSCH, Judge,
concurring in result.
I concur in the result reached by my colleagues, but I reach that conclusion by a different path. Ind.Code § 9-18-2-26(b)(1) requires that “A license plate shall be securely fastened ... to the vehicle ... (1) to prevent the license plate from swinging.” As I read the statute, it requires that a license plate be “securely fastened.” One violates the statute by having a license plate that is not securely fastened. The phrase “to prevent the license plate from swinging” merely states the purpose of the legislature in adopting such a requirement and does not impose a separate condition as do subsections (2) through (5). Thus, to me, it is immaterial whether Houston’s license plate was swinging or merely in danger of swinging; what matters is that it was not securely fastened to his vehicle.