Opinion
No. 1-981 / 01-1053.
Filed March 13, 2002.
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, MICHAEL J. NEWMEISTER, District Associate Judge.
Bobbie Jo Johnson appeals from a judgment and sentence entered following her convictions for two charges of driving while barred. AFFIRMED.
Linda Del Gallo, State Appellate Defender, and James Tomka, Assistant Appellate Defender, for appellant.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Thomas Tauber, Assistant Attorney General, Denver D. Dillard, County Attorney, and Laurie J. Craig, Assistant County Attorney, for appellee.
Considered by VOGEL, P.J., and MILLER and EISENHAUER, JJ.
Bobbie Jo Johnson appeals from a judgment and sentence entered following her convictions for two charges of driving while barred, in violation of Iowa Code sections 321.560 and 321.561 (1999). She contends the district court erred in admitting evidence gathered during an unreasonable seizure. Because her claim involves constitutional issues, our review is de novo. See State v. Wells, 629 N.W.2d 346, 351 (Iowa 2001).
Johnson was stopped while driving on March 25, 2001. The officer had observed no license plate on the front of Johnson's car. After seeing a paper license plate on the rear window, the officer wanted to verify it was legitimate. Upon reaching the vehicle, the officer determined the plate was valid. He then approached Johnson and asked for her title, insurance, and a valid driver's license. Upon determining Johnson had been barred from driving, the officer arrested her and charged her with driving while barred. The next day, the same officer saw Johnson driving the same vehicle. Relying on the information he had learned the previous night, he arrested Johnson and charged her with a second count of driving while barred.
Johnson filed a motion to suppress the evidence gained from both stops, alleging that once the officer discovered the paper license plate was valid, he had no reasonable suspicion of criminal activity and lacked any legal basis to continue to detain her. The district court denied the motion and Johnson was found guilty of both charges at the conclusion of a bench trial. She appeals, arguing the district court erred in admitting the evidence gathered during the first stop. She contends the "fruit of the poisonous tree" doctrine should have suppressed the evidence gathered at the second stop.
We find the district court properly admitted the evidence gathered from both stops because the officer did not unreasonably seize Johnson during the first traffic stop. While the officer initially determined that the paper license plate was properly displayed, he needed to see the title in order to "make sure the title matched the paper tag in back" and was not issued for another vehicle. This was a valid purpose for detaining Johnson. See State v. Jackson, 315 N.W.2d 766, 767 (Iowa 1982) (nothing prohibits a stop when there are reasonable grounds to believe a vehicle is not properly registered). Once stopped, there was nothing illegal about asking Johnson to display her license. See id. Accordingly, we affirm.
AFFIRMED.