Legal Question in Constitutional Law in Indiana

On 11/13/2009 I was pulled over for a speeding violation. At this time I was given a ticket for not carrying insurance and I lost my license for ninety days and had to pay applicable fines to receive my license back. I have been laid off from a job I had spent 11 years at due to the economy and could not afford insurance. I also had my vehicle repossessed due to failure to being unable to pay. On April 8th I received a letter from the BMV of Indianapolis stating that being I did not have insurance in 2009 that I was put in a previously uninsured motorist registry for five years. The letter also stated that being I was put in this registry that at any given time the BMV could randomly request proof of insurance from me. The letter then stated that I must show proof of insurance for 04/05/2012 if failure to do so my license would be suspended for one year with applicable reinstatement fees. Upon receiving this letter I proceeded to contact the BMV. I informed the BMV that the date in question I did not have a vehicle so I did not have insurance to show proof of. The BMV informed me this did not matter that I should still have insurance even without vehicle and that being I didn�t my license would be suspended. I called my roommate�s State farm agent and went to see her. The state farm agent called the BMV pretending to be me and the BMV told her the exact same thing. The State Farm agent informed me that it did not make sense because there was no law on the books stating that if you did not own a vehicle that one still must carry insurance. I have contacted news stations, civil rights commission, spent many hours on phone and writing letters. I even appealed the decision with the Administrative law judge and now am appealing again. Even after the hours I have spent on this matter my license was still suspended on 04/18/2012 for one year. My questions are as follows. 1.) Is this not double jeopardy am I not being punished for the same offense twice. 2.) Should the public not be made aware of these policies? 3.) If there is no law stating I have to carry insurance without vehicle why did I still get punished? On April 12th, 2011, U.S. appeals court for the 11 circuit based in Atlanta ruled 2 to 1 that it was unconstitutional to require all Americans to buy insurance or face penalties. I am planning to fight this. I had no automobile and no idea I was supposed to carry insurance without even owning a vehicle


Asked on 4/30/12, 9:01 am

1 Answer from Attorneys
Edward Hoffman Law Offices of Edward A. Hoffman

Anyone who drives must carry liability insurance. That you don't own a car is beside the point.

You are not facing double jeopardy because, even assuming this is a criminal case, you are being punished for two distinct violations of the same law. By your reasoning, anyone who is penalized once for not having insurance could get away with the same offense for the rest of her life since any subsequent punishment would be barred. Such a result would not be just.

The Eleventh Circuit ruling you describe is about health insurance, not auto insurance. The government does not require everyone to have auto insurance. That requirement applies only to people who choose to drive on public roads. It is perfectly constitutional. And the health insurance mandate decision is now being reviewed by the U.S. Supreme Court; most observers expect the Court to disagree with the Eleventh Circuit and uphold the mandate.

Read more
Answered on 4/30/12, 4:45 pm


Related Questions & Answers

More Constitutional Law questions and answers in Indiana