TOPEKA POLICE DEPARTMENT
 Number: LB 01-05
LEGAL BULLETIN
SUBJECT: NO PROOF OF INSURANCE CITATIONS
AMENDS: 
STATUTE REFERENCES:
ISSUING AUTHORITY: John Knoll, 

City Attorney

 DATE ISSUED: April 3, 2001

    I have recently received several complaints and inquiries from officers regarding municipal court no proof of insurance citations. Officers have complained that municipal court personnel were not dismissing citations when the person cited produces proof of insurance, valid at the time of the citation, in court. Officers have also inquired whether insurance charges can now be combined with other charges on the same citation form.

DISMISSAL OF NO PROOF OF INSURANCE CITATIONS

    Municipal court personnel have not been dismissing no proof of insurance citations at my request. When the municipal court police liaison position was eliminated, no one else at municipal court had been trained on what information was required to dismiss the citation. My solution was to require that persons with no proof of insurance citations obtain a docket setting and provide proof of insurance to the prosecutor. Because various parties do not appear to comply with the insurance verification process set forth in § 142-152(i)(d) and (e) of the Code of the City of Topeka (1994), as amended, collection of certain information is required in the event the victim finds out the person cited did not actually have coverage. These problems have now been resolved, so the city attorney's office has changed its policy, effective immediately.

    Municipal Court personnel will dismiss no proof insurance citations upon presentation in court of proper proof of insurance which was valid at the time of the citation. When doing so, municipal court personnel will record the following information:

• Name of the insurance company
• Insurance policy number
• Vehicle year and make (if not already present)
• Vehicle license number (if not already present), and
• Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) (if not already present)     Nothing in the above discussion should be construed to apply to persons cited for no proof of insurance who provide proof of insurance which was not in effect at the time of the citation. Those persons will be told to obtain a docket setting and discuss the matter with a prosecutor. Officers should not, under any circumstances, advise persons being cited that their citations will be dismissed if they obtain insurance and show proof to the court.

NO PROOF OF INSURANCE CHARGES CAN NOW BE COMBINED WITH OTHER CHARGES ON THE SAME CITATION FORMS

    In the past, the municipal court's computer software did not allow disposition of less than all charges appearing on one citation form. Therefore, no proof of insurance citations had to be charged on a separate citation form. However, the court's new FullCourt® software allows disposition of less than all charges on a multi-count complaint (citation) without affecting the status of the remaining charges. There is no longer any technological impediment to combining no proof of insurance charges with other charges on the same citation, therefore, Judge Roach has advised that no proof of insurance charges can be written along with other charges on the same citation, effective immediately.

THE MUNICIPAL COURT DOES NOT HAVE JURISDICTION TO PROSECUTE JUVENILES CHARGED WITH NON-ACCIDENT NO PROOF OF INSURANCE CHARGES

    In Legal Bulletin 98-2, I set forth the reasons for the above statement. There have been no legislative or judicial decisions affecting this issue, so I will reiterate the point of that bulletin: Section 142-152(i) is unenforceable against juveniles (those under the age of 18) unless the juvenile driver is involved in an accident. If an accident occurs, and the juvenile driver fails to show the officer proof of insurance, the correct charge is a violation of Standard Traffic Ordinance 25(a).

    Please advise if you have any questions about this bulletin.