Wisconsin Statutes
Wis. Stat. § 343.18 (2026)
License to be carried; verification of signature
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
343.18(1)(1) Every licensee shall have his or her license document in his or her immediate possession at all times when operating a motor vehicle and shall display the license document upon demand from any judge, justice, or traffic officer.
343.18(1m)(1m) A person charged with violating sub. (1) may not be convicted if he or she produces in court or in the office of the arresting officer a license theretofore issued to the licensee and valid at the time of his or her arrest.
343.18(2)(2) For the purpose of verifying the signature on a license, any judge, justice or traffic officer may require the licensee to write the licensee’s signature in the presence of such officer.
343.18(3)(a)(a) Except as provided in par. (c), any person who violates sub. (1) shall forfeit not more than $200.
343.18(3)(c)(c) If the person is operating a commercial motor vehicle at the time of the violation, any person who violates sub. (1) shall forfeit not less than $250 nor more than $2,500.
343.18 AnnotationThere is a public interest in permitting police to request a motorist’s license and to run a status check on the license. State v. Ellenbecker, 159 Wis. 2d 91, 464 N.W.2d 427 (Ct. App. 1990).
343.18 AnnotationUnder Ellenbecker, 159 Wis. 2d 91 (1990), it was reasonable for an officer who stopped a motorist whose vehicle and general appearance matched that of a criminal suspect to make a report of the incident, even if the officer had already decided that the driver was not the suspect. For that purpose, it was reasonable to ask for the motorist’s name and identification. Once the motorist stated that he had no identification, there was reasonable grounds for further detention. State v. Williams, 2002 WI App 306, 258 Wis. 2d 395, 655 N.W.2d 462, 02-0384.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14
cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1926–2025 · leading case: State v. Patrick H. Dalton, 914 N.W.2d 120 (Wis. 2018).
State v. Patrick H. Dalton, 914 N.W.2d 120 (Wis. 2018). “See Wis. Stat. § 343.18 (1). The consequence for not having one is a civil ticket.”
State v. Griffith, 2000 WI 72 (Wis. 2000). “05 (3)(a) [11] or Wis. Stat. § 343.18 (1). [12] There is no mention in the record that the officers attempted to determine Robinson's exact driving status at that time.”
State v. Williams, 2002 WI App 306 (Wis. Ct. App. 2002). “We next stated that Wis. Stat. § 343.18 (1) (1999-2000) 3 gives law enforcement officers the authority to require a driver of a motor vehicle to display his or her license on demand.”
State v. Heather Jan VanBeek, 2021 WI 51 (Wis. 2021). “See Wis. Stat. § 343.18 (1) (2020-21) (prohibiting the operation of a vehicle without immediately possessing one's license); Floyd, 377 Wis.”
State v. Ellenbecker, 464 N.W.2d 427 (Wis. Ct. App. 1990). “" Sec. 343.18(1), Stats. (1987-88). This section was amended by sec.”
Schroeder v. State, 267 N.W. 899 (Wis. 1936). “Likewise, in addition, the state’s evidence warranted the jury in finding that the defendants took and operated each of those automobiles without the owner’s consent upon the public highways after leaving the Langlois farm, and that the defendants were therefore guilty of…”
Bass v. State, 138 N.W.2d 154 (Wis. 1965). “Sec. 343.18, Stats., [now sec. 943.23] under which the present prosecution was commenced, provides: ‘Any person who shall take, use and operate any automobile, motorcycle, or other similar motor vehicle upon any public highway of this state without the consent of the owner…”
Eastway v. State, 206 N.W. 879 (Wis. 1926). “Plaintiff in error (hereinafter called the defendant) was convicted of taking, using, and operating an automobile upon a public highway of this state, without the consent of the owner, under sec. 343.18, Stats., and brings the judgment here for review'upon a writ of error.”
State v. Phillips, 38 P.2d 372 (Wash. 1934). “879 , wherein, quoting from the syllabus, the holding was as follows: “A prosecution for the larceny of an automobile is not a bar to a subsequent prosecution, based on the *613 same act or transaction, for taking, using, and operating the same automobile on a public highway…”
State v. Frederick S. Smith (Wis. 2018). “The court of appeals concluded the officer's actions were lawful because the request for the driver's name and identification was reasonable, even if the request came after the officer realized the driver was not the suspect the officer sought.”
Harris, Demond v. City of La Crosse (W.D. Wis. 2024). “When he was first stopped, Harris admitted that he was not carrying his license or proof of insurance, which violates Wis. Stat. § 343.18 (1) and Wis. Stat. § 344.”
Grant, Caleb v. Krolikowski, Daniel (W.D. Wis. 2025). “§ 343.18 (1). Grant didn’t do this (it turns out he didn’t have a valid license).”
— Wis. Stat. § 343.18(1) — 6 cases
State v. Griffith, 2000 WI 72 (Wis. 2000). “05 (3)(a) [11] or Wis. Stat. § 343.18 (1). [12] There is no mention in the record that the officers attempted to determine Robinson's exact driving status at that time.”
State v. Ellenbecker, 464 N.W.2d 427 (Wis. Ct. App. 1990). “" Sec. 343.18(1), Stats. (1987-88). This section was amended by sec.”
State v. Williams, 2002 WI App 306 (Wis. Ct. App. 2002). “We next stated that Wis. Stat. § 343.18 (1) (1999-2000) 3 gives law enforcement officers the authority to require a driver of a motor vehicle to display his or her license on demand.”
State v. Frederick S. Smith (Wis. 2018). “The court of appeals concluded the officer's actions were lawful because the request for the driver's name and identification was reasonable, even if the request came after the officer realized the driver was not the suspect the officer sought.”
State v. John Dean Pleuss (Wis. Ct. App. 2022).
— Wis. Stat. § 343.18(3) — 2 cases
State v. Patrick H. Dalton, 914 N.W.2d 120 (Wis. 2018). “See Wis. Stat. § 343.18 (1). The consequence for not having one is a civil ticket.”
State v. Griffith, 2000 WI 72 (Wis. 2000). “05 (3)(a) [11] or Wis. Stat. § 343.18 (1). [12] There is no mention in the record that the officers attempted to determine Robinson's exact driving status at that time.”
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.