From Florida Action Committee:
The Indiana Court of Appeals today affirmed the conviction of a man who was charged with failing to register a vehicle he “operates on a regular basis”. In this case, the defendant was driving an older pick up truck he borrowed. Although he never owned or registered the truck, he was observed driving it when he went in to register and on a date about a month earlier when he was stopped for a traffic violation. He also admitted to using it to move stuff.
He challenged the conviction because he felt the law was vague, in that it didn’t clarify what “operates on a regular basis” means. The Court upheld his conviction, finding that the five or so days when it was unquestionable he was using the truck should have caused a reasonable person to know it should have been registered.One of the justices, however, strongly dissented to the majority opinion, citing US Supreme Court Precedent that holds that ordinary people need to have notice as to what specific conduct operates on a regular basis includes, otherwise it encourages arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement.
You can read the full opinion below. Pay attention to the dissent.