What Happens if The Police Misinterpret The Law?

Not anymore. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Heien v. North Carolina that a police officer’s mistake of law can still lead to a valid search, as long as the error was objectively reasonable.

The case involved a routine traffic stop that escalated to the search of a car, discovery of narcotics, and a drug trafficking conviction. The vehicle had only one working brake light, and the officer believed North Carolina law required two functioning brake lights—even though the law didn’t actually say so. Heien argued that the traffic stop violated the Fourth Amendment because the officer’s legal mistake could not justify the search.

The key question was: Can a police officer misinterpret the law, use that as a reason for a stop, and still have the stop be valid?

The Fourth Amendment and Traffic Stops

Under the Fourth Amendment, any traffic stop is considered a “seizure.” Police must have reasonable suspicion that a driver or passenger is violating the law to stop someone legally.

When Police Get the Facts Wrong

What happens if the police stop you based on a mistake of fact?

For example:

• You drive a bright green Miata.
• A bright green Miata was reported in a recent convenience store robbery.
• Police pull you over because they mistakenly think your car matches the description.

Even if your car wasn’t involved, and you consent to a search, you could still be arrested if they find illegal items, like drugs.

Are Mistakes of Fact a Valid Defense?

Not necessarily. Courts allow objectively reasonable mistakes of fact. If a reasonable police officer would have made the same mistake given the same information, the stop is valid. Courts often give police leeway since they are trained law enforcement officers. (U.S. v. Chanthasouxat, 342 F.3d 1271, 11th Cir. 2003).

Mistake of Fact vs. Mistake of Law:

Before Heien, courts treated mistakes of fact and mistakes of law very differently.

• Mistakes of fact: If reasonable, can justify a stop or search.
• Mistakes of law: Police were previously held to a higher standard. Misinterpreting the law could invalidate a stop or search.

“There is no good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule for police who do not act in accordance with governing law… To create an exception here would defeat the purpose of the exclusionary rule.” (U.S. v. Lopez-Soto, 205 F.3d 1101, 9th Cir. 2000)

The exclusionary rule exists to deter illegal searches by keeping evidence obtained unlawfully out of court.

How the Heien Case Changed Mistake of Law

The Supreme Court in Heien changed the standard:

• Mistakes of law are now treated similarly to mistakes of fact.
• If a police officer’s legal mistake is objectively reasonable, the stop and search are valid.

In Heien, the officer stopped a car for having only one brake light, mistakenly believing the law required two. The Supreme Court ruled this mistake was reasonable, so the stop was lawful.

What This Means for Citizens

The ruling creates a double standard:

• Ordinary citizens face severe consequences for misinterpreting the law.
• Police officers, however, can make legal mistakes and still execute arrests and searches.

Critics argue that this could encourage officers to justify arrests after discovering evidence, thereby reducing the incentives to apply the law correctly.

Need Help With a Search or Arrest Case?

If you’ve been arrested or your property was searched based on a police mistake, you may still have legal options.

Metcalf Falls, Criminal Defense Attorneys, P.A. has extensive experience helping clients challenge illegally obtained evidence and protect their rights. Contact us today to discuss your case.