California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Leyva, D070048 (Cal. App. 2017):
This argument is inconsistent with the authority given to law enforcement officers to investigate possible traffic violations. With respect to tinting requirements, officers cannot be expected to know with any certainty whether a deviation from the norm constitutes a statutory violation, particularly given the many possible variations of shading. (See People v. Niebauer (1989) 214 Cal.App.3d 1278, 1293 [window tinting violation upheld].) The courts thus take a "common sense approach" to enforcing these statutes and in evaluating related traffic stops. (Id. at p. 1292.) If an experienced officer who has been trained on vehicle safety equipment laws forms an opinion that a film or tint placed on the back rear panel would obstruct the necessary lighting, this evidence is sufficient to support a traffic stop for further investigation, and it is not necessary for the officer to wait for the driver to apply the brake pedal.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.