Montana Judges a Dash Cam by Obstruction, Not by a List of Allowed Objects

The governing text is 61-9-405, MCA, whose catchline begins "Windshields required, exception -- unobstructed and equipped with wipers." Subsection (1) requires a motor vehicle other than a motorcycle, quadricycle, motor-driven cycle or farm tractor to be equipped with a front windshield meeting the requirements of 61-9-408, unless the driver wears safety glasses, goggles or face shields at all times while operating the vehicle. Subsection (2) then sets the two ways a windshield can put a driver in breach: paragraph (a) covers anything placed on the glass, and paragraph (b) covers a windshield that is shattered or so defective that it materially impairs or obstructs the clear view. Subsection (3) requires a device for clearing rain, snow or other moisture, maintained in good working order.

What makes Montana comparatively permissive is what subsection (2)(a) does not do. It does not enumerate permitted objects, it does not reserve a fixed number of square inches in a named corner of the glass, and it does not name an electronic device or a navigation display as an exception, because it does not need an exception to a rule it never wrote. The operative words are "materially obstructs, obscures, or impairs the driver's clear view," and the objects it names are a sign, poster, substance or other nontransparent material. A compact camera body on the passenger side of the mirror stem, or low against the glass behind the mirror, is a question of fact under that phrase rather than an automatic violation. The phrase also reaches side wings and side or rear windows, so a suction mount stuck to a side window is measured by the same test.

Section 61-9-109(3), MCA, is the affirmative half of the answer: "The use of additional parts and accessories on a vehicle not inconsistent with the provisions of this chapter is not prohibited." Montana therefore treats an aftermarket camera as a permitted accessory unless some other provision of chapter 9 catches it. Two others are worth checking against a particular install. Section 61-9-404, MCA, requires mirrors, so a mount that blocks the interior mirror creates a second problem. And 61-9-226(1) restricts a lighted device on a vehicle projecting more than 300 candlepower, which is the provision to read before adding an illuminated accessory rather than a plain camera.

Montana also has no statewide handheld or texting offense to complicate a windscreen mount. Title 61, chapter 8, the rules-of-the-road chapter, runs to more than 240 sections across ten parts, and none of them creates a distracted-driving, electronic-device or mobile-telephone offense; the electronic devices the chapter does name are traffic control devices, hand and arm signal devices, electric personal assistive mobility devices and ignition interlock devices. The offense a driver distracted by a screen is charged with instead is careless driving under 61-8-302, which requires driving in a careful and prudent manner that does not unduly or unreasonably endanger the life, limb, property or other rights of a person using the ways of the state open to the public. Local government can add to this: 61-9-103(1), MCA, makes the equipment chapter uniform statewide and bars a conflicting local ordinance, but expressly allows local authorities to adopt additional traffic regulations that are not in conflict, which is the mechanism several Montana cities have used.

The part of dash-cam law that catches Montana drivers out is sound, not mounting. Section 45-8-213(1)(c), MCA, makes it an offense to record or cause to be recorded a conversation by use of a hidden electronic or mechanical device that reproduces a human conversation without the knowledge of all parties to it. A camera in plain view is not a hidden device, and video with no audio does not reproduce a conversation, so an openly mounted cabin camera is outside the offense on either footing. A concealed unit recording passengers who have not been told is inside it, unless one of the exceptions in 45-8-213(2)(a) applies. Subsection (2)(a)(iii) is the practical one: a person given warning of the recording is excepted, and if one person provides the warning, either party may record. Telling passengers that the camera records audio resolves the question.

A windshield obstruction is enforced under 61-9-109(2), MCA, which makes it a misdemeanor to perform an act forbidden or fail to perform an act required under chapter 9. Because 61-9-405(2) carries no penalty of its own, the fine ladder in 61-9-511(2) applies: not less than $10 and not more than $100 for a first conviction, not less than $25 and not more than $200 for a second conviction within one year, and not less than $50 and not more than $500 for a third or subsequent conviction within one year of the first.

Section 61-9-501(1) lets the department or its agents require a driver to stop and submit to an inspection on reasonable cause to believe the vehicle is unsafe or not equipped as required by law, and 61-9-501(3) requires a written notice specifying the deficiency with 5 days to correct it. Careless driving under 61-8-302 is punished under 61-8-711 at the same $10 to $500 ladder, but 61-8-716(2) raises it sharply where the careless driving results in death or serious bodily injury, to a fine not exceeding $5,000, incarceration not exceeding 6 months, or both.

Unlawful concealed audio recording under 45-8-213 carries a fine not to exceed $500 or up to 6 months in county jail, or both, under 45-8-213(4)(a).