8-1706.
Tail lamps.
(a) Every motor vehicle, trailer, semitrailer and pole trailer, and any other vehicle which is being drawn at the end of a combination of vehicles, shall be equipped with at least two (2) tail lamps mounted on the rear, which, when lighted as required in K.S.A. 8-1703, shall emit a red light plainly visible from a distance of one thousand (1,000) feet to the rear, except that passenger cars manufactured or assembled prior to July 1, 1959, shall have at least one (1) tail lamp. On a combination of vehicles, only the tail lamps on the rearmost vehicle need actually be seen from the distance specified. On vehicles equipped with more than one (1) tail lamp, the lamps shall be mounted on the same level and as widely spaced laterally as practicable.
(b) Every tail lamp upon every vehicle shall be located at a height of not more than seventy-two (72) inches nor less than fifteen (15) inches.
(c) Either a tail lamp or a separate lamp shall be so constructed and placed as to illuminate with a white light the rear registration plate and render it clearly legible from a distance of fifty (50) feet to the rear. Any tail lamp or tail lamps, together with any separate lamp or lamps for illuminating the rear registration plate, shall be so wired as to be lighted whenever the head lamps or auxiliary driving lamps are lighted.
History:
L. 1974, ch. 33, § 8-1706; July 1.
Notes of Decisions
United States v. Wilson, 96 F. App'x 640 (10th Cir. 2004).
· cites it 2× “There is no dispute here that Deputy Watkins was justified in initially stopping the truck for failing to illuminate the rear license plate in violation of -9- Kan. Stat. Ann. § 8-1706 (c). See United States v.”
Fillmore v. Eichkorn, 891 F. Supp. 1482 (D. Kan. 1995).
· cites it 5× “” Counsel for the defendant troopers contend that this statute authorized Eich-korn’s stop of plaintiffs truck. Despite the break in the taillight, plaintiff contends that the taillight emitted a red light plainly visible from a distance of one thousand feet as required by K.”
State v. Jamison, 806 P.2d 972 (Kan. 1991).
· cites it 2× “8-262; failure to have all tail lamps operable, K.S.A. 8-1706; and speeding, K.S.A. 8-1336.”
State v. Lees, 432 P.3d 1020 (Kan. Ct. App. 2018).
“8-1705 (headlights); K.S.A. 8-1706 (taillights); K.S.A. 8-1722 (hazard lights).”
State v. Anthony (Kan. Ct. App. 2020).
· cites it 3× “At the suppression hearing, Anthony argued that Hanika's report cited an inapplicable statute, K.S.A. 8-1706, and suggested that Hanika lacked reasonable suspicion to stop her car.”
State v. Moss (Kan. Ct. App. 2020).
“8-133 and that Moss had a defective license tag light in violation of K.S.A. 8-1706(c). The State claims that Toolin's reasonable suspicion did not dissipate when he approached the vehicle and observed the tag.”
— K.S.A. § 8-1706(c) — 1 case
State v. Moss (Kan. Ct. App. 2020).
“8-133 and that Moss had a defective license tag light in violation of K.S.A. 8-1706(c). The State claims that Toolin's reasonable suspicion did not dissipate when he approached the vehicle and observed the tag.”
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.