A. It shall be unlawful for any person (i) to drive a motor vehicle on a highway in the Commonwealth with any object or objects, other than a rear view mirror, sun visor, or other equipment of the motor vehicle approved by the Superintendent, suspended from any part of the motor vehicle in such a manner as to substantially obstruct the driver's clear view of the highway through the windshield, the front side windows, or the rear window or (ii) to alter a passenger-carrying vehicle in such a manner as to obstruct the driver's view through the windshield. However, this section shall not apply (a) when the driver's clear view of the highway through the rear window is obstructed if such motor vehicle is equipped with a mirror on each side, so located as to reflect to the driver a view of the highway for at least 200 feet to the rear of such vehicle, (b) to safety devices installed on the windshields of vehicles owned by private waste haulers or local governments and used to transport solid waste, or (c) to bicycle racks installed on the front of any bus operated by any city, county, transit authority, or transit or transportation district. The provisions of clause (ii) shall not apply to the lawful immobilization of vehicles pursuant to § 46.2-1216 or 46.2-1231.
B. No law-enforcement officer shall stop a motor vehicle for a violation of this section. No evidence discovered or obtained as the result of a stop in violation of this subsection, including evidence discovered or obtained with the operator's consent, shall be admissible in any trial, hearing, or other proceeding.
C. The provisions of this section shall not be construed to prohibit the suspension and use of any dashboard camera and any accompanying wires or attachments in or on a motor vehicle provided that (i) such suspension and use are not otherwise prohibited by the provisions of Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations and (ii) such camera, wires, and attachments are wholly or mostly concealed behind the rear view mirror without any additional obstruction to the driver's view.
1960, c. 122, § 46.1-291.1; 1972, cc. 8, 844; 1987, c. 135; 1989, c. 727; 2003, c. 273; 2019, c. 510; 2020, Sp. Sess. I, cc. 45, 51; 2023, c. 235.
Notes of Decisions
Loren Anthony Mason, Jr. v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 767 S.E.2d 726 (Va. Ct. App. 2015).
· cites it 122× “” Mason conceded in the trial court that the officer made a traffic stop of the sedan believing that “he was acting properly” pursuant to Code § 46.2-1054. Id. at 89. At the time of the traffic stop, Mason was a passenger in the sedan.”
Mason v. Commonwealth, 786 S.E.2d 148 (Va. 2016).
· cites it 26× “Code § 46.2-1054 provides, in pertinent part: It shall be unlawful for any person to drive a motor vehicle on a highway in the Commonwealth with any object or objects, other than a rear view mirror, sun visor, or other equipment of the motor vehicle approved by the…”
William Edward Freeman, Jr. v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 778 S.E.2d 519 (Va. Ct. App. 2015).
· cites it 43× “The evidence was obtained after law enforcement officers stopped him on suspicion of having objects hanging from his rearview mirror that obstructed his clear view of the highway, in violation of Code § 46.2-1054. 1 Freeman argues that no reasonable suspicion existed to support…”
Loren Anthony Mason, Jr. v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 760 S.E.2d 831 (Va. Ct. App. 2014).
· cites it 64× “ANALYSIS Mason argues on appeal that “the trial court erred in failing to grant [his] motion to suppress controlled substances seized by Officer Richards of the Waverly Police Department when the Commonwealth failed to meet its burden in showing that he had reasonable and…”
Joseph Leon Matthews v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 778 S.E.2d 122 (Va. Ct. App. 2015).
· cites it 2× “Mocello (“Officer Mocello”) of the Leesburg Police Department initiated a traffic stop of Matthews’s vehicle based on an object dangling from the rearview mirror, in violation of Code § 46.2-1054. 2 When Officer Mocello approached the vehicle, he asked Matthews for his license…”
Thomas v. Commonwealth, 701 S.E.2d 87 (Va. Ct. App. 2010).
· cites it 2× “The officers also observed objects dangling from the rearview mirror that appeared to be in violation of Code § 46.2-1054 (prohibiting the suspension of "any object or objects” in a way as to "obstruct the driver’s clear view of the highway through the windshield”).”
City of Chesapeake v. Evans, 91 Va. Cir. 247 (Chesapeake Cir. Ct. 2015).
· cites it 46× “1, regarding the ruling of the Chesapeake General District Court that Va. Code § 46.2-1054 (incorporated into the Chesapeake Code of Ordinances by Chesapeake Code § 74-4) is unconstitutionally vague.”
Loren Anthony Mason, Jr. v. Commonwealth of Virginia (Va. Ct. App. 2014).
· cites it 32× “ANALYSIS Mason argues on appeal that “the trial court erred in failing to grant [his] motion to suppress controlled substances seized by Officer Richards of the Waverly Police Department when the Commonwealth failed to meet its burden in showing that he had reasonable and…”
Commonwealth of Virginia v. Kenneth Maurice Bryant (Va. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 12× “e presence of something in the windshield but whether or not the officer could reasonably suspect from the circumstances that the size and position and shape of the object in relation to the windshield posed an actual safety issue, potential safety hazard, that would, in fact,…”
— Va. Code Ann. § 46.2-1054(B) — 1 case
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.