Art Eatman
Moderator In Memoriam
DMF and I were PMing on another subject; he mentioned some time pressures for some "gotta do" stuff. There's more to life than the Internet. 
Art
Art
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
traffic stop searches - how do they ask
- Thread starter Stebalo
- Start date
- Status
-
Not open for further replies.
Chip Dixon
Member
Hawkmoon,
Speaking from personal experience, the officers MAY trash the car if you don't consent and then they get a warrant. A few of my friends were going out to a concert when I was in high school, got pulled over for speeding, and the cops wanted to search the car. The driver said no. The police proceeded to take everyone out of the car one by one to question the people in the car, as apparently the officer thought one of them looked stoned. One of the kids "smelled" wrong, so they searched the car, found a pipe, and so everyone got sent to jail for a bit. When the car was received back from impound everything was in a big pile strewn throughout the car, and several of the interior panels in the car had broken fasteners and clips on them -- so the car never really was the same again.
What does this teach you? Don't take people that are high around in your car.
Speaking from personal experience, the officers MAY trash the car if you don't consent and then they get a warrant. A few of my friends were going out to a concert when I was in high school, got pulled over for speeding, and the cops wanted to search the car. The driver said no. The police proceeded to take everyone out of the car one by one to question the people in the car, as apparently the officer thought one of them looked stoned. One of the kids "smelled" wrong, so they searched the car, found a pipe, and so everyone got sent to jail for a bit. When the car was received back from impound everything was in a big pile strewn throughout the car, and several of the interior panels in the car had broken fasteners and clips on them -- so the car never really was the same again.
What does this teach you? Don't take people that are high around in your car.
Art Eatman
Moderator In Memoriam
"Trashing" isn't particularly common, and it can vary with time and jurisdictions.
A few years back there was a rash of unwarranted inspections with trashing in Louisiana. There was enough of it that a national uproar ensued, with AAA routing tourists away from Louisiana. The loss of tourist dollars quickly put an end to the problem.
Art
A few years back there was a rash of unwarranted inspections with trashing in Louisiana. There was enough of it that a national uproar ensued, with AAA routing tourists away from Louisiana. The loss of tourist dollars quickly put an end to the problem.
Art
Taipei Personality
Member
A couple of people on this thread have mentioned a guy getting his door kicked in when he wasn't there and the ATF leaving his guns unsecured after the search.
His name was John Lawmaster and it happened in Oklahoma. His case can be found at http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/usr/wbardwel/public/nfalist/lawmaster_v_ward.txt
And, for what it's worth, another side of the story: http://www.hoboes.com/pub/Politics/Tax Cops/John Lawmaster
His name was John Lawmaster and it happened in Oklahoma. His case can be found at http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/usr/wbardwel/public/nfalist/lawmaster_v_ward.txt
And, for what it's worth, another side of the story: http://www.hoboes.com/pub/Politics/Tax Cops/John Lawmaster
cropcirclewalker
member
I lifted below out of the court stuff.
Stress can be a killer.
No, I'm not a conspiracy guy. It just appears that takin' the govt. to court may be bad fer yer health. Maybe added lots of stress.6. On August 13, 1997, the Defendants-Appellees filed documents
with this court suggesting Mr. Lawmaster is now deceased and
requesting us to suspend appellate proceedings pursuant to Fed. R.
App. P. 43(a).
Stress can be a killer.
PATH
Member
DMF,
I suppose the government is all good. No President would ever use the CIA for domestic purposes. The FBI would never be used to intimidate people. J. Edgar would never have allowed that. The IRS would never be used to harass enemies of a particular administration.
No President or his cabinet would allow the will of Congress to be subverted. No President would ever compile an "enemies" list.
No President would ever invent an incident in order to take this country to war.
Government agencies serve the purpose of the elected. You as an employee take orders and toe the line. You like your paycheck as much as I do.
I do not wish to be sarcastic but I believe it strains credulity to suggest that government agencies and their agents do not at times step over the line. I don't care to engage in tin foil hat conspiracies but I do not trust the government or its agents.
I am not looking at small incidents but rather at a larger pattern of abuse of power at the highest levels. Government agencies can be used to intimidate and coerce. They have been used in this manner.(See Watergate investigation.)
I would not consent to any search of my vehicle ever. Officers of the 30th Precinct in New York "flaked" suspects and made bogus arrests. These officers were later caught and prosecuted but hey things like this happen.
Even with the cameras rolling you can have evidence planted in your vehicle.
I shall, during a traffic stop, provide license, registration, and proof of insurance and nothing more. I shall not engage in conversation with any officers in the course of their duties. Funny how some things can be mis- interpreted and land one in a world of hurt. I shall never consent to a search or volunteer information of any sort.(Family lawyer gave me that advice.) By the way I have never recieved a moving violation while driving.
I believe an FBI Agent in Tennessee murdered a local woman he was having an affair with. Another FBI Agent compromised this country's security by giving up a number of spies in Russia. Those spies were subsequently eliminated by the Russians and our intelligence operations severely compromised.
The majority of Agents are decent hard working folks. I know a few. There are bad apples in every agency though. Government agencies have a circle the wagon mentality. Try and be a whistle blower and see what happens!
What about the FBI crime lab? What about the abusive behavior of an ATF agent that I personally witnessed while in a gun store?
I guess what I am trying to say is that there are abuses and it is naive to believe that they never happen. They do happen. They happen more than anyone is willing to admit.
In the end my OATH OF LOYALTY is to the CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES and to no other entity or ideology. The rights of the citizenry are to be respected. The Fourth Amendment is sacrosanct and I encourage all citizens to remember that fact. NEVER consent to search and never trust your rights to others!
That is my .02 cents and I will now get off my soap box!
I suppose the government is all good. No President would ever use the CIA for domestic purposes. The FBI would never be used to intimidate people. J. Edgar would never have allowed that. The IRS would never be used to harass enemies of a particular administration.
No President or his cabinet would allow the will of Congress to be subverted. No President would ever compile an "enemies" list.
No President would ever invent an incident in order to take this country to war.
Government agencies serve the purpose of the elected. You as an employee take orders and toe the line. You like your paycheck as much as I do.
I do not wish to be sarcastic but I believe it strains credulity to suggest that government agencies and their agents do not at times step over the line. I don't care to engage in tin foil hat conspiracies but I do not trust the government or its agents.
I am not looking at small incidents but rather at a larger pattern of abuse of power at the highest levels. Government agencies can be used to intimidate and coerce. They have been used in this manner.(See Watergate investigation.)
I would not consent to any search of my vehicle ever. Officers of the 30th Precinct in New York "flaked" suspects and made bogus arrests. These officers were later caught and prosecuted but hey things like this happen.
Even with the cameras rolling you can have evidence planted in your vehicle.
I shall, during a traffic stop, provide license, registration, and proof of insurance and nothing more. I shall not engage in conversation with any officers in the course of their duties. Funny how some things can be mis- interpreted and land one in a world of hurt. I shall never consent to a search or volunteer information of any sort.(Family lawyer gave me that advice.) By the way I have never recieved a moving violation while driving.
I believe an FBI Agent in Tennessee murdered a local woman he was having an affair with. Another FBI Agent compromised this country's security by giving up a number of spies in Russia. Those spies were subsequently eliminated by the Russians and our intelligence operations severely compromised.
The majority of Agents are decent hard working folks. I know a few. There are bad apples in every agency though. Government agencies have a circle the wagon mentality. Try and be a whistle blower and see what happens!
What about the FBI crime lab? What about the abusive behavior of an ATF agent that I personally witnessed while in a gun store?
I guess what I am trying to say is that there are abuses and it is naive to believe that they never happen. They do happen. They happen more than anyone is willing to admit.
In the end my OATH OF LOYALTY is to the CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES and to no other entity or ideology. The rights of the citizenry are to be respected. The Fourth Amendment is sacrosanct and I encourage all citizens to remember that fact. NEVER consent to search and never trust your rights to others!
That is my .02 cents and I will now get off my soap box!
dojpros1998
Member
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2003
- Messages
- 32
I AM NOT YOUR LAWYER/I AM NOT GIVING LEGAL ADVICE/SEARCH AND SEIZURE LAW CAN BE,BY ITS VERY NATURE , VERY FACT SPECIFIC
In short, you may withhold consent with a polite no. However, that may not be the end of the encounter, depending on the facts and circumstances of a particular case in a particular jurisdiction.
There are often a number a half truths in many "what can a leo do threads" often put forth by well meaning posters who may or may not be correct. The following is my understanding of federal law in the 8th Circuit (MO, AR,IA, SD, ND, NE & MN)
An officer may ask for consent to search at any time, you may refuse at any time.
Your refusal may not stop an officer from seaching your vehicle if he/she otherwise has reas suspicion/pc.
In many jurisdictions, virtually all traffic infractions are arrestable offenses. An officer could therefore arrest you for a traffic violation and search you incident to arrest and search your vehicle (to include locked containers therein) pursuant to an inventory search.
As mentioned above, an officer may search, accessable areas in the vehicle for officer safety reasons. Evidence of a crime observed in plain view, percieved via plain smell or plain feel or otherwise discovered in an area that would be accessable can constutute r/s and p/c to expand seach/investigation (This makes a lot more sense when it is one leo stopping two strapping youth at 0200 on a dark side street that two leos stoppong a 16 yr old female at 1400 on main st.)
any traffic violation, however minor, creates probable cause for a leo to stop a vehicle, even if it is a pretext for another investigation. i.e stopping a car on the highway for following too closely when you are really focusing on drug interdiction
an officer, during the course of the traffic stop may ask driver to step out of vehicle and accompany officer to his/her patrol car
an officer may ask name, destination and purpose of trip, officer may also ask passengers the same type of questions to verify information provided by driver
whether an officer has reasonable suspicion to expand the course of the stop of a traffic stop is dertermined by looking at the totality of the circumstances in light of the officer's experiences i.e nervous demenor of driver and/or passenger, inconsistent answers, lack of identification, items seen in plain view, items percieved via smell, type of vehicle, route, time of day or night etc
Asuming reasionable susp of criminal activity, an officer may detain a vehicle for a reasonable time for a dog sniff (case law has defined reasonable time to be at least 80 minutes in a particular case)
A dog sniff is not a search under the 4th, and may be performed without reasonable suspicion or probable cause (this would assume that the dog was on site at the stop almost immediately ie k-9 officer that stopped car for speeding ran dog arround the car before even contacting the driver on the stop.)
A dog alerting to the presences of contraband in a vehicle constitutes PC to search the vehicle and containers therein without a warrant.
The 4th A only porhibits unreasonble seaches not all searchs.
There are many exceptions to the warrant req of the 4thA ie
border searchs
administrative searches ie airports
automobile exception
exigent circumstances
consent
etc-this is not an exaustive list
If you dont want to consent dont. Just know that you saying no may not end the encounter. In many states you dont have the right to resist arrest, even an unlawful one. You have the right to seek redress on the back end ie civil lawsuit. I mention this because I am concerned that someone will read a post like this and needlessly escalate a situation where people can get hurt. As always YMMV.
In short, you may withhold consent with a polite no. However, that may not be the end of the encounter, depending on the facts and circumstances of a particular case in a particular jurisdiction.
There are often a number a half truths in many "what can a leo do threads" often put forth by well meaning posters who may or may not be correct. The following is my understanding of federal law in the 8th Circuit (MO, AR,IA, SD, ND, NE & MN)
An officer may ask for consent to search at any time, you may refuse at any time.
Your refusal may not stop an officer from seaching your vehicle if he/she otherwise has reas suspicion/pc.
In many jurisdictions, virtually all traffic infractions are arrestable offenses. An officer could therefore arrest you for a traffic violation and search you incident to arrest and search your vehicle (to include locked containers therein) pursuant to an inventory search.
As mentioned above, an officer may search, accessable areas in the vehicle for officer safety reasons. Evidence of a crime observed in plain view, percieved via plain smell or plain feel or otherwise discovered in an area that would be accessable can constutute r/s and p/c to expand seach/investigation (This makes a lot more sense when it is one leo stopping two strapping youth at 0200 on a dark side street that two leos stoppong a 16 yr old female at 1400 on main st.)
any traffic violation, however minor, creates probable cause for a leo to stop a vehicle, even if it is a pretext for another investigation. i.e stopping a car on the highway for following too closely when you are really focusing on drug interdiction
an officer, during the course of the traffic stop may ask driver to step out of vehicle and accompany officer to his/her patrol car
an officer may ask name, destination and purpose of trip, officer may also ask passengers the same type of questions to verify information provided by driver
whether an officer has reasonable suspicion to expand the course of the stop of a traffic stop is dertermined by looking at the totality of the circumstances in light of the officer's experiences i.e nervous demenor of driver and/or passenger, inconsistent answers, lack of identification, items seen in plain view, items percieved via smell, type of vehicle, route, time of day or night etc
Asuming reasionable susp of criminal activity, an officer may detain a vehicle for a reasonable time for a dog sniff (case law has defined reasonable time to be at least 80 minutes in a particular case)
A dog sniff is not a search under the 4th, and may be performed without reasonable suspicion or probable cause (this would assume that the dog was on site at the stop almost immediately ie k-9 officer that stopped car for speeding ran dog arround the car before even contacting the driver on the stop.)
A dog alerting to the presences of contraband in a vehicle constitutes PC to search the vehicle and containers therein without a warrant.
The 4th A only porhibits unreasonble seaches not all searchs.
There are many exceptions to the warrant req of the 4thA ie
border searchs
administrative searches ie airports
automobile exception
exigent circumstances
consent
etc-this is not an exaustive list
If you dont want to consent dont. Just know that you saying no may not end the encounter. In many states you dont have the right to resist arrest, even an unlawful one. You have the right to seek redress on the back end ie civil lawsuit. I mention this because I am concerned that someone will read a post like this and needlessly escalate a situation where people can get hurt. As always YMMV.
- Status
-
Not open for further replies.
Similar threads
- Replies
- 43
- Views
- 8K
- Locked
- Replies
- 94
- Views
- 7K