Per Curiam. The defendant’s first claim of error is that the defendant’s stop sign, which was improperly located so as to be obscured from view, could not as a matter of law be a highway defect. This claim was not raised in the trial court in any way, and does not qualify for review under the plain error doctrine. The defendant’s second claim of error, namely, that there was insufficient evidence of constructive notice, is without merit. There is no error.