MBE Rules · Criminal Procedure
Reasonable Mistake of Law
Heien v. North Carolina
The rule
Reasonable suspicion may rest on an officer's objectively reasonable mistake of law about an ambiguous statute, as well as reasonable mistakes of fact.
In plain English
A reasonable mistake of law occurs when a police officer mistakenly believes that a law is applicable due to its ambiguity, and this belief is deemed reasonable. This means that if an officer acts on this misunderstanding, their actions may still be justified under the law.
Worked example
Officer Jones stops a driver for allegedly violating a new traffic law that was poorly worded and unclear. After reviewing the statute, it becomes clear that the law did not apply to the driver's actions. However, because Officer Jones's mistake was reasonable given the ambiguity of the law, the stop is upheld as valid.
Memory hook
Mistakes of law can be reasonable if the statute is unclear.
The trap
Exams may present scenarios where the ambiguity of the law is subtle, leading students to overlook the officer's reasonable belief. Students might confuse reasonable mistakes of law with unreasonable ones.
How examiners test it
Questions often involve fact patterns where an officer's actions are scrutinized based on their understanding of a vague statute, testing the student's ability to identify the reasonableness of the mistake.
Drill this rule until it can't fail you.
Vrenberg generates unlimited questions on this exact rule, tracks your mastery of it, and brings it back until it sticks.