A few weeks ago I was pulled over for playing my stereo too loud. The cop pulled me over in an apartment complex which i believe is considered private property. He walked up to my window to ask for my license and registration. In the county I live in, a cop has to be wearing his hat to be considered in full uniform, which he wasnt. Before asking, he began to sniff around the car, to see if he smelled marijuana. After handing him my license, he walked to his car to run my information. Then he came back to my car and asked me to step out of the car. He told me to walk to the trunk of my car, where he searched me, without telling me what he was searching me for and without asking me to search me. Then he asked my friend to step out of the car and proceeded to search without asking. He then went to my car and started searching it, where he said he found a small flake of marijuana in plain view. He walked back to the trunk where I was and showed it to me and said I was being put under arrest for possession and put me in handcuffs. Then he put my friend in handcuffs. He didnt read either of us our rights. He then asked me about the weed and asked if there was anymore in the car. I told him I didn't know. He then started to search my car, broke open my glovebox, which was locked and found a bowl with resin on it. Then he popped my trunk and started to search that. He then proceeded to put me in the patrol car and search my car some more. After searching some more and finding a little baggie of weed, he came back to the car and started to check my record. I asked him what was going on and he said he was figuring out whether or not to take me to jail. I asked him why he searched me and he said my eyes were red, which was bullshit because I hadn't smoked in like 2 hours. He also said my friends eyes were red and he hadn't smoke in a few days. After that he wrote me my tickets for the possession, but wasn't going to write me a ticket for the loud music, which he originally pulled me over for, and even said after writing the tickets for possession, "Oh yeah, let me write you a ticket for what I pulled you over for". Then he let me go. Bottom line, this officer is notorious for being a douche and searching people on bullshit reasons like this. The whole situation started with him screwing up by smelling my car, which I knew he was smelling for weed, then searching me without permission, searching my friend without permission, claiming there was marijuana in plain view, then searching my car without permission, didn't read us any rights, broke open my glovebox, which was locked, searched my trunk, on private property, without a hat on, which means he wasn't in full uniform. I know he just pulled me over to search my car, but is this an illegal search? I got a ticket a few days before because of loud music and a different cop pulled me over, ran my information, gave me my ticket and let me go on about my business. I can't have a possession charge and I'm going to court for it so I need to know if I should fight it or not.
-
Welcome to our legal community! Click here or the create new topic button to ask a question and receive answers and comments from our friendly and helpful legal community.
Articles that answer frequent legal questions are in our Law Guide. Important legal news is reported in The Law JournalYou can find a lawyer near you in the Lawyer Directory. If you know that you need to hire an attorney, you can submit a case review from a lawyer.
Arrest, Search, Seizure, Warrant illegal search - consent, probable cause, miranda rights
- Thread Starter rwc0122
- Start date
- Status
Hey, this is a good one that surely will go to the Supreme Court: The search was illegal because the cop did not wear his hat. This will write criminal procedure history.
OK, enough kidding. Actually, even if the cop had been wearing underwear only that would not influence the issue if the search and seizure were legal or not.
Now, let me give you some criminal procedure law background:
-If a cop has "resonable suspicion" that some kind of crime is afoot, he can stop a car, and order out all passengers in the car. "Reasonable suspicion" is less than "probable cause". A traffic violation or some kind of disorderly conduct is enough to satisfy the "crime afoot" element.
-Once a cop has stopped the car and ordered the passengers out he can "frisk" them, that is perform a short search for weapons only. He neds to have some kind of suspicion that the person could be armed, but that requirement is not very strict. He also can perform a short weapons search in the area the stopped persons could reasonably reach, especially in the passenger compartment of the car. Again he needs no probable cause for that, this is a safety measure for the cop's safety.
-Anything the cop finds when he performs this search that is in "plain view" or can be instantly identified by "plain touch" can be used against the person searched.
It also can give probable cause.
-Now, when the cop has probable cause or even cause to arrest, his powers to search are broadened: a cop can conduct a full search "incident to arrest" if the person gets arrested, can conduct an "inventory search" if the car gets impounded and this is standard policy, or can conduct a warrantless search if there are exigent circumstances.
So, this is the basic law. Now you need to have your attorney look at what exactly took place and then see where you go from there.
OK, enough kidding. Actually, even if the cop had been wearing underwear only that would not influence the issue if the search and seizure were legal or not.
Now, let me give you some criminal procedure law background:
-If a cop has "resonable suspicion" that some kind of crime is afoot, he can stop a car, and order out all passengers in the car. "Reasonable suspicion" is less than "probable cause". A traffic violation or some kind of disorderly conduct is enough to satisfy the "crime afoot" element.
-Once a cop has stopped the car and ordered the passengers out he can "frisk" them, that is perform a short search for weapons only. He neds to have some kind of suspicion that the person could be armed, but that requirement is not very strict. He also can perform a short weapons search in the area the stopped persons could reasonably reach, especially in the passenger compartment of the car. Again he needs no probable cause for that, this is a safety measure for the cop's safety.
-Anything the cop finds when he performs this search that is in "plain view" or can be instantly identified by "plain touch" can be used against the person searched.
It also can give probable cause.
-Now, when the cop has probable cause or even cause to arrest, his powers to search are broadened: a cop can conduct a full search "incident to arrest" if the person gets arrested, can conduct an "inventory search" if the car gets impounded and this is standard policy, or can conduct a warrantless search if there are exigent circumstances.
So, this is the basic law. Now you need to have your attorney look at what exactly took place and then see where you go from there.
OK, no kidding, I've actually heard of quite a few cases getting dismissed in the county I live in because the cop wasn't wearing his hat and is therefore not in full uniform, so he's not considered 'on duty'. And you didn't even answer my question you just told me a bunch of shit I already knew so thanks for nothing. Why would he search us for weapons, when I've been pulled over 3 or 4 times by different cops and never been searched. I'm trying to figure out if this would be an illegal search so I won't go to jail or have my license suspended.
I would definitely get a lawyer, obviously. Getting stopped for loud music and having it turn into a full blown drug investigation is stretching it, and claiming red eyes was the reason for it is even stretching it farther. Cops pulling you out of the car to search you for weapons lessens (which they have the right to do) the risk of you getting at a weapon that is back in the car, so checking a [locked] glove box while you weren't even in the car (if I read that correctly) for weapons in stretching it also...IMO
Difference between Reasonable v.s.Probable cause
Can anyone elaborate on these 2 differences. I would like to further understand them:
Reasonable suspicion v.s. Probable cause
"A traffic violation or some kind of disorderly conduct is enough to satisfy the "crime afoot" element."
<<-If a cop has "resonable suspicion" that some kind of crime is afoot, he can stop a car, and order out all passengers in the car. "Reasonable suspicion" is less than "probable cause".>>
Can anyone elaborate on these 2 differences. I would like to further understand them:
Reasonable suspicion v.s. Probable cause
"A traffic violation or some kind of disorderly conduct is enough to satisfy the "crime afoot" element."
<<-If a cop has "resonable suspicion" that some kind of crime is afoot, he can stop a car, and order out all passengers in the car. "Reasonable suspicion" is less than "probable cause".>>
zippysgoddess
New Member
Reasonable suspicion could be as simple as the officer thinking the car was being driven erratically, or suspecting he saw someone smoking pot, then if he thinks he smells it when he pulls the car over, he has valid reason to conduct his search, without permission.
He also does not have to read your miranda rights, unless you are actually charged with a crime, until then, he does not have to read them to you.
He also does not have to read your miranda rights, unless you are actually charged with a crime, until then, he does not have to read them to you.
zippysgoddess
New Member
Probable cause, for instance, would be an officer driving by and seeing someone breaking into a home, then he has cause to arrest the person and conduct a search of them and the premises in question.
In either of these cases, he does not need a warrant to make the arrest or conduct the searches.
In either of these cases, he does not need a warrant to make the arrest or conduct the searches.
<<Reasonable suspicion could be as simple as the officer thinking the car was being driven erratically, or suspecting he saw someone smoking pot, then if he thinks he smells it when he pulls the car over, he has valid reason to conduct his search, without permission.>>
That is kind of shocking because i'm sure some immoral police offers use 'reasonable suspicion' to get over. 'Reasonable suspicion could be as simple as an officer THINKING....' So all he has to do is say he thought he saw someone smoking a joint when it was a cigarette, just so that he can pull them over. Now, he can lie and say, i smell pot, when it can be dirty socks, underwears, laundry, etc, ...just so that he can search that car and find something hidden that is illegal. Now, how do you fight that in court?
<<Reasonable suspicion could be as simple as the officer thinking the car was being driven erratically>>
Wow, if a car is driven erractically, that still gives an officer permission to conduct a search? I'm just concerned because erractic to one person is different to another unless a person is really driving bad.
How about if an officer pulls you over and says your eyes are red...can he search your car thinking your smoke weed? lol? I'm just curious.
Guess, we all need cameras in our cars to protect ourselves from immoral and dirty officers. Note: I respect the law and all officers that serve the country well.
That is kind of shocking because i'm sure some immoral police offers use 'reasonable suspicion' to get over. 'Reasonable suspicion could be as simple as an officer THINKING....' So all he has to do is say he thought he saw someone smoking a joint when it was a cigarette, just so that he can pull them over. Now, he can lie and say, i smell pot, when it can be dirty socks, underwears, laundry, etc, ...just so that he can search that car and find something hidden that is illegal. Now, how do you fight that in court?
<<Reasonable suspicion could be as simple as the officer thinking the car was being driven erratically>>
Wow, if a car is driven erractically, that still gives an officer permission to conduct a search? I'm just concerned because erractic to one person is different to another unless a person is really driving bad.
How about if an officer pulls you over and says your eyes are red...can he search your car thinking your smoke weed? lol? I'm just curious.
Guess, we all need cameras in our cars to protect ourselves from immoral and dirty officers. Note: I respect the law and all officers that serve the country well.
You can't be serious
I just stumbled upon this thread while looking for a case citation to use in explaining the whole Utah Rave incident on another forum and couldn't help but not only register, but comment on such a fine post.
First, although I am new here I understand that people with over a thousand posts on any form deserves a certain level of respect. Your failure to show such respect when you are asking a question of people on the forum is appalling.
-Get a good, expensive attorney.
-Getting a head start on community service.
-Buy a bus pass.
-If you're subject of an investigation in the future, don't confess to your crime on an Internet message board where your IP address is logged.
I just stumbled upon this thread while looking for a case citation to use in explaining the whole Utah Rave incident on another forum and couldn't help but not only register, but comment on such a fine post.
First, although I am new here I understand that people with over a thousand posts on any form deserves a certain level of respect. Your failure to show such respect when you are asking a question of people on the forum is appalling.
I'll buy this part, though the person getting off based on only this fact must have one hell of an attorney.rwc0122 said:
Something tells me that if you understood the various levels of suspicion giving rise to different levels of police encounters, you probably wouldn't be asking this question in the first place. You receive bonus points for starting a sentence with "And".rwc0122 said:
Sounds like you were pretty lucky the last times. Maybe you should reconsider your driving habits/volume level of your Limp Bizkit CD/look of your sweet souped up Civic. Police tend to pull over people that attract attention.rwc0122 said:
Though I'm not licensed to practice law in any state, and am not giving any kind of legal advice I will give you four things to consider:rwc0122 said:
-Get a good, expensive attorney.
-Getting a head start on community service.
-Buy a bus pass.
-If you're subject of an investigation in the future, don't confess to your crime on an Internet message board where your IP address is logged.
refusetostop
New Member
BOurn3 I don't know where you came from but I could not have said it better myself!
The person who responded to the guy who just can't seem to walk out his front door without getting pulled over, searched, harrassed etc is great. That was a perfect rebuttal.
I would have been more direct. For example, Hey idiot! if you continually get stopped for loud music maybe you should turn your white/nigga music down because you sound like a real asshole and probably belong in jail. Normally, people who play their music loud are seeking attention. I'm guessing you are a "high school drop out", have no life and are a major "pull" on society in general. If you were my son, I would "kick your ass in" then ask if all of your answers have satisfactorally been answered? If not? I would proceed to put your head through a wall because you definetly need "the wake up call of life." Grow up, get an education, become an alcoholic if your not already one, get married, have kids, get divorced and die like the rest of us and quit worrying about the faggot cop without the fairy hat!!!!!
I would have been more direct. For example, Hey idiot! if you continually get stopped for loud music maybe you should turn your white/nigga music down because you sound like a real asshole and probably belong in jail. Normally, people who play their music loud are seeking attention. I'm guessing you are a "high school drop out", have no life and are a major "pull" on society in general. If you were my son, I would "kick your ass in" then ask if all of your answers have satisfactorally been answered? If not? I would proceed to put your head through a wall because you definetly need "the wake up call of life." Grow up, get an education, become an alcoholic if your not already one, get married, have kids, get divorced and die like the rest of us and quit worrying about the faggot cop without the fairy hat!!!!!
buckleywilliams
New Member
Could not have said it better myself
buckleywilliams
New Member
I just noticed DKHD was banned! What for? It sounds to me like the best advice this KID could have received here, other than to get a lawyer about his case, is a stern lecture about common decency and appropriate behavior. Someone obviously complained, probably the loud music kid with the question? Was the truth to hard to hear? Did it hurt this kids tender feelings. It sounds like the kid complained because he didn't get the answer he wanted. His behavior in constantly getting pulled over for loud music and then complaining about it sounds like the kid is a real baby and cries like a baby when he doesn't get his way. If DKHD is banned, then you may as well ban me because I'm through with this site as well. Good job DKHD. I understand the sarcasm to make your point. Then again my IQ is higher than a very respectable golf score. I doubt the site, or the kid will understand my sarcasm either.
buckleywilliams
New Member
DKHD, if you are a lawyer and are able to respond I want to find out how to handle a situation. I have a legal question for you, if you are a lawyer. I realize you made no reference to being an attorney. I have a very serious medical malpractice case where an implant dentist implanted or inserted seven implants into a patient and two went all the way through to and up through into the patients sinus cavity. The doctor did not reveal this to the patient ever since the procedure started taking place. A year has gone by and the patient found out he has two, two inch implants up in his sinus cavity. The oral surgeon apparently just had a stroke and under advice of his own lawyers closed his practice and vacated the building. Nothing remains of the old office, except the floor, walls and ceiling. Does my friend have a suit against this oral surgeon. He is looking to get his implants properly fixed and the two that are now stuck in his sinus cavity removed. I assume there was medical insurance carried by the oral surgeon?
buckleywilliams
New Member
I forgot, the implants were placed into my friend 18 months ago, however they started falling out within the first few weeks. So all of this has occurred within 18 months. Any other person who may know something which could provide direction for me to give to my friend would be appreciated.
buckleywilliams - Do you and DKHD know each other? This is unusual.
1) I have no idea why he was banned and it may be that a moderator did this since he replied to a thread that is literally 7 years old. This is most frequently done by spammers. I don't know, we'd check into such things and remove the ban if requested appropriately.
2) If you're posting about a completely different topic, why are you posting it here in this thread which has no relation to the problem you have? How about if you start a new thread in the area of law which you hope to have answers and a good discussion? You'll find more people able to find the issue and willing to discuss it.
1) I have no idea why he was banned and it may be that a moderator did this since he replied to a thread that is literally 7 years old. This is most frequently done by spammers. I don't know, we'd check into such things and remove the ban if requested appropriately.
2) If you're posting about a completely different topic, why are you posting it here in this thread which has no relation to the problem you have? How about if you start a new thread in the area of law which you hope to have answers and a good discussion? You'll find more people able to find the issue and willing to discuss it.
disagreeable
Well-Known Member
Wonderful, we recognize your protest. Don't think anyone will waste the time to ban you though. As you are both involved in a necro-post, I would think OP has already been tried, sentenced and served his time. The first winner was likely banned for his user name. Since you haven't noticed any of these things, I wonder about the golf score. I thought you were to good too use this site and wanted banned. Go figure. Though the dentist likely had insurance, getting the suit filed against a closed business will not likely be successful if the corporation has been dissolved. Your friend needs a local lawyer on this.
Last edited:
- Status
Share this page
