Legal Opinion
Commonwealth v. Starr
Massachusetts Appeals Court
Decided August 16, 2002No. 00-P-1061PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJacobs, J.
We hold that the operator of a motor vehicle has no reasonable expectation of privacy in a “number plate” that is *591required by law1 to be “displayed conspicuously” on that vehicle. The context of our decision follows.
After a District Court bench trial, the defendant was convicted under G. L. c. 90, § 23, of operating a motor vehicle after the revocation of his license.2 That trial had followed the denial of the defendant’s motion to suppress evidence obtained as a result of a police stop of his vehicle. By stipulation, the only evidence before the judge at both the motion hearing and the trial…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Katz v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Delaware v. ProuseSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- New York v. ClassSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Sharon Olabisiomotosho v. City of Houston City of Houston P. J. Bartlett K. L. Richards Rene BertrandCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1999
- Commonwealth v. GrandisonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2001
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Commonwealth v. MuckleMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2004
- Commonwealth v. DoraMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2003
- Commonwealth v. FeyenordMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2004
- COMMONWEALTH v. STANLEY S., a juvenile.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 2021
- Commonwealth v. LongMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2020
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.