Idaho Code
Idaho Code § 49-235 (2026)
Enforcement by peace officers.
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IClegislature.idaho.gov
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Enforcement by peace officers.
(1) The director of the Idaho state police, his officers and employees, and other peace officers as the director of the Idaho state police may authorize in writing may, upon reasonable cause, require the driver of a vehicle to stop and submit the vehicle and its equipment to an inspection and a test as may be appropriate.
(2) In the event a vehicle is found to be in an unsafe condition, or the required equipment is not present, or is not in proper repair and adjustment, the officer shall give a written notice to the driver and send a copy to the Idaho state police. The notice shall require that the vehicle be placed in safe condition and its equipment in proper repair and adjustment, and a certificate of inspection and approval for the vehicle be obtained within five (5) days. Every owner or driver upon receiving such a notice shall comply with the notice and shall within the five (5) days secure an endorsement upon the notice by the person making the repair or adjustment that the vehicle is in safe condition and its equipment in proper repair and adjustment, and shall forward the notice to the Idaho state police.
(3) No person shall operate any vehicle after receiving a notice as provided in this section, until the vehicle and its equipment have been placed in proper repair and adjustment and otherwise made to conform to the requirements of this title.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3
cases, 1984–1986 · leading case: Dullenty v. Rocky Mountain Fire & Cas. Co., 721 P.2d 198 (Idaho 1986).
Dullenty v. Rocky Mountain Fire & Cas. Co., 721 P.2d 198 (Idaho 1986). “I.C. § 49-235. Proof of such liability insurance must be carried in any motor vehicle operated in Idaho and be displayed on request to any peace officer, and failure to do so is also made criminal.”
State v. Reed, 686 P.2d 842 (Idaho Ct. App. 1984). “Accordingly, we conclude that I.C. § 49-235 does not infringe upon substantive due process.”
Sterling v. Bloom, 723 P.2d 755 (Idaho 1986). “ntly in its supervision of Bloom in at least the following particulars: (1) allowing Bloom to drive a motor vehicle for nonemployment purposes, contrary to the order of probation; (2) allowing Bloom to operate a motor vehicle without the required written permission, contrary to…”
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.