Duri ng the early morni ng hours, a shooti ng took place in a parking lot of an
apartment compl ex. The crime scene was large. There were a lot of shell casings
scattered. Ther e were multiple parki ng lots at the compl ex. Three vehicles were
damaged duri ng the shooti ng.
Speci fically, an individual armed with a firearm stood on top of a vehicle in one
of the apartment compl ex's parki ng lots and fired off shots. After determi ning that the
car belonged to a woman who was seemi ngly not invol ved in the altercati on, but rather
a resident of the apartment building, pol ice staked out the car and ordered an officer
to follow it when a man drove the car away. The man commi tted no traffi c violations,
and there was no questi on that he was not the registered owner of the vehicle. Yet the
police stopped him, and ultimatel y arrested him for having a suspended driver's license
and no proof of i nsurance.
The questi on here is whether that traffi c stop was lawful where the police had
no idea who the driver was but knew the regi stered owner of the vehi cle was nei ther
involved in a crime nor driving the vehicle. This Court's decision in Kansas v. Glover ,
140 S. Ct. 1183 (2020 ), establ ished a presumpti on that the registered owner of a
vehicle is most likely the driver of the vehicle, but where police have no reasonabl e
suspi cion to pull over the registered owner and have no other informati on regardi ng
who is actually driving, police shoul d not be allowed to make an investi gatory stop
absent some other factor.

Whether the traffic stop was lawful where the police had no idea who the driver was but knew the registered owner of the vehicle was neither involved in a crime nor driving the vehicle