IN: Yes, there’s some subjectivity in window tint violations, but that doesn’t make stops illegal

A window tint stop based on inability to see the occupants was reasonable and justified, despite the fact it turned out the window tinting was actually legal. Before learning the tint was legal, it was discovered defendant’s DL was expired which lead to a search incident to his custodial arrest. Johnson v. State, 992 N.E.2d 955 (Ind. App. 2013):

We will admit that the degree of concern, suspicion, or knowledge that Johnson was committing a traffic violation was not overwhelming. Unlike running a red light or turning without signaling or speeding as measured by a radar gun, there is much subjectivity that goes into deciding whether a window of a moving car is too dark under the Window Tint Statute. And, again, the State does not dispute that the minivan’s windows were factory standard. Still, the degree of suspicion was not non-existent. We also will acknowledge that the State’s interest in enforcing the Window Tint Statute is not an overwhelmingly pressing public safety concern. Again, the red light, failure to signal, and speeding examples are all more inherently dangerous than having overly-tinted windows. Nonetheless, there are legitimate law enforcement and safety interests in prohibiting the operation of vehicles with excessive window tinting, and police officers are entitled to enforce the statute.