49 C.F.R. § 571.115
[Reserved]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9
cases, 1978–2001 · leading case: New York v. Class, 475 U.S. 106 (1986).
New York v. Class, 475 U.S. 106 (1986). “See 49 CFR § 571.115 (1984). The VIN is roughly analogous to a serial number, but it can be deciphered to reveal not only the place of the automobile in the manufacturer's production run, but also the make, model, engine type, and place of manufacture of the vehicle.”
United States v. Caro, 248 F.3d 1240 (10th Cir. 2001). “at 111-12 (quoting 49 C.F.R. 571.115 (1984)); see also 49 C.”
State v. Larocco, 742 P.2d 89 (Utah Ct. App. 1987). “Appeal was based on *94 denial of defendant's motion to suppress. The Court discussed at length the purposes served by VINs and the federal statute requiring that all automobiles have a VIN in plain view of someone outside the car.”
Morgan v. State, 906 S.W.2d 620 (Tex. App. 1995). “Additionally, while federal regulation, 49 C.F.R. § 571.115 (1984), requires that manufacturers place the VIN in plain view of someone outside the automobile, New York statute authorizes officers to demand that drivers reveal their VIN.”
United States v. Larry R. Radtke, 799 F.2d 298 (7th Cir. 1986). “See 49 C.F.R. § 571.115 (1984). The VIN is roughly analogous to a serial number, but it can be deciphered to reveal not only the place of the automobile in the manufacturer’s production run, but the make, model, engine type and place of manufacture of the vehicle.”
United States v. $277,000.00 U.S. Currency One 1986 Dodge Ram Charger, Jalisco, Mexico Lic. No. Hwy773, & Ramon S. Montes, Claimant-Appellant, 941 F.2d 898 (9th Cir. 1991). “49 CFR § 571.115 (S4.6). . The fact that another officer, an expert in stolen cars, later found the VIN and determined that it had a numbering sequence consistent with vehicles manufactured in Mexico, does not affect Officer Gorman’s good faith belief that the VIN was not where…”
State v. Hudson, 407 S.E.2d 583 (N.C. Ct. App. 1991). “See 49 C.F.R. 571.115 (1990). This number is used in a computer check to determine if the vehicle has been reported as stolen.”
People v. Giese, 95 Misc. 2d 792 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1978). “That definition is found in the Code of Federal Regulations (49 CFR 571.115) implementing the National Safety and Motor Vehicle Act ("Safety Act”) of 1966 (US Code, tit 15, § 1381 et seq.”
Untitled California Attorney Gen. Opinion (Cal. Att'y Gen. 1988). “( 49 C.F.R. § 571.115 , S.4.) Since no two vehicles can bear the same VIN, the VIN designation distinguishes one particular motor vehicle from all others.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.