“That’s Not Against the Law”: When Police Invent Traffic Rules to Search Your Car

By: John Guidry

Don’t we have enough laws already? Aren’t there enough reasons to stop a citizen minding their own business? Apparently not.

We know that traffic stops often lead to vehicle searches, and searches lead to drug arrests.

• The Pretext: Police use minor infractions (rolling a stop sign, dark tint) to fish for drugs.
• The Mistake: But what happens when the officer pulls you over for something that isn’t actually illegal?

Today, let’s talk about “Mistake of Law” stops—where the police get the law wrong, and you go free.

Did the police pull you over for a “violation” that doesn’t exist?

If the stop was illegal, the drugs must be suppressed. Call John today at (407) 423-1117.

Case #1: The Missing Rearview Mirror (Leslie v. State)

One driver was pulled over for not having a center rearview mirror in his car.

• News Flash: The absence of a center rearview mirror is NOT illegal in Florida.
• The Law: Florida law requires only one mirror that allows you to see 200 feet behind you. That can be a side mirror. You do not need the center one.

The Ruling: In Leslie v. State, 108 So. 3d 722 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013), the Court threw out the drugs found during the stop.

• The Logic: This was a “Mistake of Law.” An officer cannot justify a stop based on a law that doesn’t exist. Since the stop was illegal from the moment the lights turned on, everything found afterward (the drugs) was suppressed.

Case #2: The Paint Job (Van Teamer vs. Aders)

Now, let’s look at a gray area (or a “Green area”). Is it legal to stop a car because the paint color doesn’t match the registration?

• The Scenario: You drive a Green Chevy. The officer runs your tag, and the computer says “Blue Chevy.” He pulls you over, suspecting a stolen car or switched tag.
• The Reality: It is perfectly legal to paint your car in Florida, and you are not required to report the color change to the DMV.

The Conflict:

• The Good Case (Van Teamer): The First DCA ruled that a color discrepancy alone is NOT enough to stop a car. They reasoned that if this were allowed, anyone with a new paint job would be subject to constant police harassment.
• The Bad Case (Aders): The Fourth DCA ruled the opposite, saying the mismatch created “Reasonable Suspicion” that the car was stolen.

So, who is right?

John’s 2026 Update: The Supreme Court Ruled (We Won!)

Note: In the article above, I hoped the Florida Supreme Court would fix this. They did.

1. The Final Ruling: State v. Teamer The Florida Supreme Court settled the debate in State v. Teamer, 151 So. 3d 421 (Fla. 2014).

• The Decision: They agreed with us! The Court ruled that a color discrepancy, standing alone, is NOT Reasonable Suspicion.
• The Logic: Because painting a car is innocent, legal behavior, the police cannot assume you are a criminal just because your car is a new color. The stop is illegal.

2. The Heien Loophole (Federal Law) Shortly after Teamer, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Heien v. North Carolina that a “Reasonable Mistake of Law” can justify a stop.

• The Danger: Prosecutors now try to use Heien to save bad stops. They argue, “The officer reasonably thought that was illegal.”
• The Defense: We argue that Teamer still protects Floridians. In Florida, it is unreasonable for an officer to assume “Color Change = Stolen Car,” so Heien doesn’t save them.

3. ALPRs & The “Computer Glitch” Stop In 2026, officers don’t run tags manually; Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs) do it for them.

• The Trap: The camera reads your plate, detects your car is Red, checks the database for “Blue,” and alerts the officer.
• The Strategy: We demand the ALPR Data Logs. If the officer admits, “I stopped him because the machine alerted to a color mismatch,” we slam the Teamer case on the judge’s desk. A computer alert based on legal behavior is just as unconstitutional as a human one.

Know Your Vehicle Laws

Police rely on you not knowing the traffic code. They rely on you thinking a center mirror is required or that a color mismatch is a crime. It isn’t. If they stopped you for a fake law, we can get the real evidence thrown out.

Call me at (407) 423-1117. Let’s analyze the stop.

About John Guidry II

John Guidry II is a seasoned criminal defense attorney and founder of the Law Firm of John P. Guidry II, P.A., located in downtown Orlando next to the Orange County Courthouse, where he has practiced for over 30 years. With more than three decades of experience defending clients throughout Central Florida since 1993, Guidry has successfully defended thousands of cases in Orange, Seminole, Osceola, Brevard, Lake, and Volusia counties. He has built a reputation for his strategic approach to criminal defense, focusing on pretrial motions and case dismissals rather than jury trials.

Guidry earned both his Juris Doctorate and Master of Business Administration from St. Louis University in 1993. He is a member of the Florida Bar and the Florida Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. His practice encompasses the full spectrum of Florida state criminal charges, with a particular emphasis on achieving favorable outcomes through thorough pretrial preparation and motion practice.

Beyond the courtroom, Guidry is a prolific legal educator who has authored over 400 articles on criminal defense topics. He shares his legal expertise through his popular YouTube channel, Instagram, and TikTok accounts, where he has built a substantial following of people eager to learn about the law. His educational content breaks down complex legal concepts into accessible information for the general public.

When not practicing law, Guidry enjoys tennis and pickleball, and loves to travel. Drawing from his background as a former recording studio owner and music video producer in the Orlando area, he brings a creative perspective to his legal practice and continues to apply his passion for video production to his educational content.