Legality of Unmarked Police Cars
"Unmarked cars are almost universally approved and supported by a wide cross-section of law enforcement. Their use in traffic law enforcement deters a wide variety of criminal and unsafe drivers from acting out, thus enhancing the safety of the driving public."
The legality of unmarked police cars also varies by state and type of police agency. Federal law does not address the issue; however, there is no federal statute prohibiting an unmarked police car under the federal uniform crime reporting agency guidelines. Pursuant to federal law, that car should not be identified as an official government vehicle.
The first state offering guidance on what is legally allowed in terms of unmarked cars was Maryland, which originally enacted a law on this matter in 1966. The law limits the definition of "police vehicle" to fully marked vehicles , except those unmarked vehicles issued to certain Peace Officers. The law also prohibits use of sirens or lights while driving outside the scope of official law enforcement activities.
Most states follow Maryland’s example, with only a few exceptions. For example, Ohio and Wisconsin have laws allowing unmarked police vehicles which can lawfully operate on limited access highways, and Georgia’s law allows unmarked vehicles to operate on roads with a posted speed limit of 65 miles per hour or faster. Some police agencies, like the City of Fargo, ND, have an official policy governing when to use unmarked cars—restricting highway patrols and requiring marked vehicles to respond on calls involving emergency lights.
Purpose and Benefits of Unmarked Patrol Units
It is standard practice to utilize unmarked patrol vehicles for surveillance and traffic enforcement needs. Surveillance needs can include undercover work on cannabis stores, street level drug buyers/sellers, gang activity, prostitution, domestic disturbance calls, wanted persons, and fleeing vehicles. Should an officer see suspicious behavior he/she can call out on the radio and the patrol unit will respond with its marked vehicle. Having an officer in an unmarked patrol vehicle makes the search of a suspect who flees on foot much easier as there is no need to match socks and shoes. Further, a marked patrol unit proceeding to the scene is not limited by vehicular traffic, as the officer with the unmarked patrol unit can park/stop anywhere, including the sidewalk in front of the suspect’s house/vehicle, so as to cut-off any escape routes. The use of unmarked patrol vehicles allows officers to do their job more efficiently and effectively.
Likewise, many jurisdictions use unmarked patrol vehicles for traffic enforcement. As per People v. Carolyn Barlow, et al, 2013, the Court of Appeal of California regarding whether or not the defendant could be stopped by a deputy "in civilian clothes and driving an unmarked police car" held "we reject that argument. When a law enforcement officer in an unmarked police unit is acting in the line of duty, he is not a private citizen ‘for Fourth Amendment purposes’ so long as the officer’s identity as a police officer was (or could have been) clearly displayed…The officer in this case did not violate the Fourth Amendment when he stopped defendant in the marked police vehicle."
Concerns and Misuse
Lack of knowledge about unmarked police cars within the general public underscores a number of concerns. First, many citizens worry about being subjected to an arrest for a traffic violation by someone posing as an officer. The growing problem of "citizen’s arrest" within the United States is a concern because it puts criminals in the position of acting as though they are law enforcement officials.
Concerns have also been voiced about acts of vigilantism by individuals who may utilize unmarked police cars as a way to intimidate and threaten victims. For example, Robert Osborn of Bloomburg, Texas, was accused of kidnapping, raping, and murdering 22-year-old woman Michelle Wallace in 1993. In 1998, Osborn offered a cab driver $1,200 if he would pull over in a stretch of desolate road an Osborn could "impersonate a policeman and get his victim." Not surprisingly, the cab driver refused. Osborn, however, found another cab drive and demanded that he pull over, removing his gun when the driver refused. Eventually he was arrested after driving aggressively and trying to evade other motorists prompting a police investigation.
Not long after this incident, a similar incident occurred in California. A man attempted to pull over a truck driver using his unmarked police car. When the driver pulled over, the man climbed into the cab, pointing a gun to the driver’s head demanding money. The driver fled, managing to survive the employee of B & B Trucking.
Perhaps the most severe misuse of unmarked police cars occurred in 2005 in Ohio when three men were arrested for using a red Chevy Impala with "Police Interceptor" scratched out as an attempt to impersonate law enforcement officials. After pulling over six witnesses and robbing them, bystanders began following the vehicle, forcing the robbers to flee. After fleeing and ditching the vehicle, one of the assailants was shot and killed; the other two were apprehended. A police officer later told a local news crew: "They were dressed like police officers. They had multiple weapons, police radios, handcuffs, fully operational police car lights."
Legal Guidelines and Limitations
There are myriad legal limitations and guidelines on when officers may use unmarked police cars. Some jurisdictions have even taken this practice a step further by creating mandatory programs for unmarked cars when it comes to setting out exactly when an officer can use them.
For example, a series of guidelines in Washington, D.C. ban the use of unmarked vehicles for traffic stops. However, marked patrols seem to be issuing more citations than unmarked patrols in the city. And Washington is not alone; the New York State Police issued a guideline that officers should not perform radar tests for speeding violations in unmarked police cars. The officers are only allowed to perform crash memorial activities.
In California, all 76 CHP unmarked cars are no longer allowed to be used for normal law enforcement purposes. These cars are also known as "stealth vehicles , " and they are only permitted for two purposes: traffic collisions, and only if two marked patrol units are available; and pursuit operations.
And even a few unmarked police cars for the Hickory County Sheriff’s Office in Missouri are under fire for their use. The sheriff’s office has five unmarked cars that have faced some scrutiny after officials were caught on social media tweeting about their convenience for visiting Starbucks in Camdenton. However, Sheriff Michael Crites said the cars are completely exempt from accidents or traffic violations.
Through these guidelines and limitations, there are exceptions in every state. Officers are still able to operate unmarked cars, especially (and ironically) for marked traffic details. These include traffic control and checkpoints, backup on traffic violations (especially DUI stops), roadblocks, stakeouts and undercover operations.
Citizen Rights During Stops by Unmarked Police Vehicles
Aside from certain traffic stops initiated by marked police cars, the vast majority of unmarked police cars that will pull you over are from the Chicago Police Department. In these instances, there are two very important reasons not to panic.
First, regardless of whether the police vehicle is marked or unmarked, if you believe that an officer is attempting to initiate an investigatory stop, you have the legal right to confirm that the officer is an officer and he/she is engaged in a lawful act. This right stems from the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which protects citizens from unlawful search and seizure. To ensure that the officer is engaged in a lawful act, it is usually recommended to just comply with the officer’s commands (if safe to do so) and pull over on your own. However, if you are uncomfortable doing so, you have the right to:
Assuming you have reasonably established that the police vehicle was not an unmarked police vehicle, you have the right to continue on your way. Second, even if the police vehicle is indeed an unmarked police vehicle, CPD has an established protocol for traffic stops. It is very important to realize the fact that CPD officers have either been sufficiently trained or been given instructions that their unmarked police cars are not used for traffic stops unless certain requirements are met.
In situations where the officer has stopped you and you reasonably believe that the officer is not following proper CPD procedure, you have the right to request a badge number and ensure that the officer is complying with CPD policy, which states as follows:
You may also ask how the officer would like you to identify yourself. Although you are not required to answer this question, it is important to understand that it is not a question that is limited to just your name or address. If the officer feels that you are uncertain in identifying yourself or just confused about the entire situation and he/she really believes that you are not complying with his/her order, he/she is required by CPD policy to get on the radio and receive assistance. Thereafter, another officer (marked or unmarked – but preferably marked) comes to the situation to confirm that this is in fact an actual police traffic stop. Only then may the second officer give orders in accordance with CPD policy.
Prominent Cases and Precedents
Over the years, a number of cases have drawn all manner of attention, from the absurd to the macabre, relating to the use of unmarked police cars to issue citations. One such case, for example, involved an officer in a Honda Accord chasing down a driver of a SUV with emergency lights flashing and sirens blaring for completely unrelated reasons. The officer in the unmarked car (and his passenger) were so distracted by the chase that they crashed into four other vehicles, injuring four people and costing the police department more than $55,000 in damages alone.
More relevant, perhaps, is how these enforcement practices have been addressed by appellate courts, because the practice of using unmarked patrol cars for traffic enforcement has been challenged and upheld many times. One of the most notable, brought before a New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division, addressed this specific question:
Does N.J.S.A. 39:4-203.1 , which allows the Director of the Division of Motor Vehicles to issue guidelines for the operation of unmarked police vehicles, empower the Division of State Police to authorize local police departments to permit their officers to operate unmarked police cars on highways to issue citations for traffic law violations, notwithstanding the fact that N.J.S.A. 40A:14-146 expressly prohibits officers of local police departments in this State from using unmarked vehicles to enforce State traffic laws?
In the end, the court found, as have those in previous cases, that the statute does indeed permit local police departments to employ unmarked patrol vehicles in their policing efforts. In the years since, this precedent has been maintained.
It’s also important to note that while some states do place restrictions on the ability of local police departments to use unmarked vehicles, even in those cases, it is often possible to apply for an exception when the need arises.