CCW stop

Status
Not open for further replies.

jacob_j_p

Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2011
Messages
6
Hi, first post here after lurking for quite a while.

Anyway, I was leaving a cookout today when I was pulled over by police with guns drawn, and instructed to leave the vehicle. I did as was told, and informed the police of my ccw status. After chatting a while they told me they were tipped off that there was gunfire in the neighborhood (it isn't the best neighborhood) and that my vehicle was reported leaving the area. We talked a while, the police cleared my gun and looked through my car a bit. Then they let me go.

Just wondering if there's anything I should have done, or still need to do now that is over.

Thanks all.
 
Um, yeah, why you let them in your car
why did you let them play with your gun
why?

You know you could have said "no thank you"
stopping a car because it's a car... yeah thin, REAL thin
 
That all sounds good in theory, but when police are approaching your car with guns drawn, you don't really want to be non-compliant.

Also, they never asked to go through the car, it was a second pair of police that came to the scene that looked around the front seats.
 
The front door was left open because of the police instruction to leave the car. They went in to the front seat and turned the car off, and looked around while they were there.
 
I have a lock box underneath the seat for when I can't carry a gun into a building, and that was pulled away from underneath the seat. Other than that I couldn't say I was moved too far away and behind the car to tell.
 
I would still consider that searching. But I'm pretty sure they were within their rights to search it. Most states only require reasonable cause for the officers safety to search your car, which shots fired and your car being described as leaving the scene is reasonable cause, and they can search passengers and drivers compartments and any compartments within the passengers compartment, but the trunk would not be covered under this. They can also do this for reasonable suspicion the occupant has a firearm, but it can once again only be a limited search that the occupant would have immediate access to. A full search and seizure can be performed if the occupant is arrested or has previous drug related charges. The vehicle can also be searched if the vehicle will be impounded for inventory purposes. It is an exception to the 4th amendment for motorized vehicles.
 
That's good to know. I'm still wondering if there is anything I should be doing after the fact.
 
when you step out of your car, lock the door (as you stand up) and shut it behind you
they want to open it, they'll need a warrant.

A terry frisk, search it.
'officer safety' they need good reason, not what they think 'just because'
 
I should have worded that more clearly. They can search any vehicle in the way I stated without a warrant for any reasonable suspicion, OR officer safety with reasonable suspicion. If you're underage and see a beer bottle in your back seat, they can search In the ways I described. If they believe there is a firearm in the vehicle they can also perform a limited search, if the have suspicion you have commuted a crime (like when my fiance was pulled over for the first time she was literally shaking and we were searched for suspicion of non related crime due to occupants state of nervousness). This can all be done without a warrant. And locking the door would further increase suspicion.
 
SPIKE, NOPE...
PLAIN sight, if the car is closed, door locked,
its not 'immediate area' for a Terry search, hence NOPE...

get a warrant, they want to hold, you, REFUSING A SEARCH IS NOT ENOUGH
and if they do, and you lawyer up, they pay out to make you go away, cause the judgement gets REALLY expensive.
 
Last edited:
The OP was described leaving the scene of a reported crime, and admitted to be in possession of a firearm (although legally). That would stand up in court as reasonable cause to search his vehicle where he had immediate access to. Doors locked or not. And as he said, they checked under his seat more than likely for another firearm.

The same as in my situation the being described as leaving the scene of a crime, and possesion of a firearm is plenty.
 
"The motor vehicle exception was first established by the United States Supreme Court in 1925, in Carroll v. United States. The motor vehicle exception allows an officer to search a vehicle without a search warrant as long as he or she has probable cause to believe that evidence or contraband is located in the vehicle. The exception is based on the idea that there is a lower expectation of privacy in motor vehicles due to the regulations they operate. Additionally, the ease of mobility creates an inherent exigency to prevent the removal of evidence and contraband. In Pennsylvania v. Labron the U.S. Supreme Court, stated, “If a car is readily mobile and probable cause exists to believe it contains contraband, the Fourth Amendment thus permits police to search the vehicle without more.”

The scope of the search is limited to only what area the officer has probable cause to search. The motor vehicle exception in addition to allowing officers to search the vehicle also allows officers to search any containers found inside the vehicle that could contain the evidence or contraband being searched for. The objects searched do not need to belong to the owner of the vehicle. In Wyoming v. Houghton, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the ownership of objects searched in the vehicle is irrelevant to the legitimacy of the search."

It was easier to copy. And there are no legal guidelines as to what probable or reasonable cause is.
 
Just randomly stopping people for someone shooting...
did his car match a description
did he?

just saying, he needs to start reading about what is and isn't legal, there is a difference, because they can, doesn't mean it's legal, and that can make a HUGE difference in court.

Also, are you required to inform? because if you weren't, well, toss. As for what reasonable and probably cause, yes, there are VERY STRICT guidelines on it, to say otherwise is disingenuous.
plenty of good cases are tossed because cops overstepped their bounds, and plenty of innocent people have been destroyed cooperating.
 
Just randomly stopping people for someone shooting...
did his car match a description
did he?

just saying, he needs to start reading about what is and isn't legal, there is a difference, because they can, doesn't mean it's legal, and that can make a HUGE difference in court.

Also, are you required to inform? because if you weren't, well, toss. As for what reasonable and probably cause, yes, there are VERY STRICT guidelines on it, to say otherwise is disingenuous.
plenty of good cases are tossed because cops overstepped their bounds, and plenty of innocent people have been destroyed cooperating.
The OP states that his specific car was reported leaving the area. And you are right, plenty of cases have been tossed. But many haven't. For Probable cause an officer must be able to point out "specific and articulable" facts that would indicate to a reasonable person that a crime has been, is being, or is about to be committed, and totality of circumstances. Cases with warrants have been dismissed for the same reasons and you cannot just attribute the cases being thrown out to not having a warrant where the cases have had evidence dropped, Because probable cause was deemed insufficient after the fact. There is no legal guidelines as to what probable cause is as it is case by case. Some states do however require that a warrant be obtained for these type of searches unless the LEO reasonably believes there is not enough time to obtain such a warrant. But this would more than likely be decided after the fact during the trial.

In this situation the LEO had every right to search his vehicle unless his state requires a warrant and it can be established he had enough time to obtain the warrant.
 
I have known cops who use that pitch on every single car they stop for any reason other than a traffic stop. If they can panic the driver into giving them permission or leaving the door open, they don't have to go to all the inconvenience of getting a warrant. Yes. Really. All the time.
 
I have known cops who use that pitch on every single car they stop for any reason other than a traffic stop. If they can panic the driver into giving them permission or leaving the door open, they don't have to go to all the inconvenience of getting a warrant. Yes. Really. All the time.
But unless we see a report, or the OP takes this to court we cannot assume the officer was lying to skip the red tape. Once again, this would have to come up in court before we can determine the officer did not have probable cause, since the search has already been performed.
 
Not if they trick him into giving permission or leaving the door open.
We cannot assume the OP was tricked into anything since he has stated that he was given what a reasonable person would consider probable cause. A description of his car, reported shots fired, and being in possession of a firearm. And do not believe the LEO would hold him at gun point unless their statements were true. Now they could have been lying, but given the OPs description of what happened I seriously doubt the officers were lying. The officers seemed to have reasonable doubt that they were engaging a man who was armed and possibly dangerous.

I could be wrong. But I doubt an officer would go through that just to try and trick him into letting the search his car so that they could charge him with something else.
 
Um, yeah, why you let them in your car
why did you let them play with your gun
why?

You know you could have said "no thank you"
stopping a car because it's a car... yeah thin, REAL thin

Exactly,

No real probable cause. I would have said no your not searching my car. No your not taking my gun and clearing it or doing anything with it without a warrant. If you do I want my lawyer immediately

Sent from my mind using ninja telepathy.
 
I would still consider that searching. But I'm pretty sure they were within their rights to search it. Most states only require reasonable cause for the officers safety to search your car, which shots fired and your car being described as leaving the scene is reasonable cause, and they can search passengers and drivers compartments and any compartments within the passengers compartment, but the trunk would not be covered under this. They can also do this for reasonable suspicion the occupant has a firearm, but it can once again only be a limited search that the occupant would have immediate access to. A full search and seizure can be performed if the occupant is arrested or has previous drug related charges. The vehicle can also be searched if the vehicle will be impounded for inventory purposes. It is an exception to the 4th amendment for motorized vehicles.

Not sure where you live but here it has to be plain view searches without a warrant meaning no looking through the glove box. No looking under the seats etc.

Sent from my mind using ninja telepathy.
 
when you step out of your car, lock the door (as you stand up) and shut it behind you
they want to open it, they'll need a warrant.

A terry frisk, search it.
'officer safety' they need good reason, not what they think 'just because'

Amen

Sent from my mind using ninja telepathy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top