Dear List:
With this issue going all over the board, I went the extra mile and actually
researched the issue. The following is the Nevada statute on the issue. The
California law is similar, and the statute can be found at Cal. Veh. Code
10750. A second criminal statute also describes criminal sanctions, and is
found at Cal. Veh. Code. 10802.
NRS 482.553 Unlawful destruction or alteration of number of motor or other part
of motor vehicle or other mark of identification; placement of serial numbers;
penalty.
1. A person shall not intentionally deface, destroy or alter the motor
number, other distinguishing number or identification mark of a vehicle
required or employed for registration purposes or the identification number or
other distinguishing number or identification mark of a part of a motor vehicle
which was placed or stamped on that part by the manufacturer pursuant to
federal law or regulation without written authorization from the department,
nor shall any person place or stamp any serial, motor or other number or mark
upon a vehicle or the parts thereof except one assigned thereto by the
department. [Comment from me: Note that it is the number that is not to be
altered. Removal for paint and reattachment in no way alters the number, and
the number always remained the same.]
2. This section does not prohibit the restoration by an owner of the
original vehicle identification number when the restoration is authorized by
the department, nor prevent any manufacturer from placing in the ordinary
course of business numbers or marks upon new motor vehicles or new parts
thereof. [Comment from me: This section does not relate to removal and
reinstallation. This section addresses a recovered stolen vehicle or some
other circumstance causing an actual defaced or destroyed Vin plate or tag.]
. . .
4. Any person who violates any provisions of subsection 1 is guilty of a gross
misdemeanor.
California also dealt with the Vin plates and tags in the case of People v.
Joiner (Web address after quote below). In construing the law, the court
stated:
"Accordingly, our analysis begins with a review of the relevant language set
forth in section 10802, which is as follows:
b Any person who knowingly alters, counterfeits, defaces, destroys, disguises,
falsifies, forges, obliterates, or removes vehicle identification numbers, with
the intent to misrepresent the identity or prevent the identification of motor
vehicles or motor vehicle parts, for the purpose of
sale, transfer, import, or export, is guilty of a public offense .b&b
Section 10802 prohibits certain activities designed to intentionally
misrepresent the identity of a vehicle or prevent identification of a vehicle
or its parts. The language of the statute does not permit a construction that
any activity designed to intentionally misrepresent the identity of a vehicle
or prevent identification is sufficient. Had the
Legislature intended such a broad application, it would have used language such
as b including but not limited tob altering, defacing, etc. vehicle
identification numbers with
the requisite intent.
People v. Joinerb&
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/californiastatecases/f028186.pdf
In this sense, there must be intent to misrepresent, and actual defacement or
alteration. The idea of removing a vin tag for paint and then reinstalling it
being a crime just doesn't exist.
Again, this is not to suggest that flags won't be raised or explanations won't
have to be made. Prudence certainly dictates that you just leave the darn
thing alone. Still, no one is going to jail, and no car is being crushed, so
long as the plate goes back on a Tiger it came off of and not a cute little
underpowered effete Alpine. (Actually, I like Alpines).
Bob Nersesian
B382000975
|