Drug Crimes, Substance Abuse Illegal Stop?

[Old_Fogie]

My 19 yr old son was driving w/a girlfriend in the car @ approx 5:00 PM. Cops stopped them for no reason (no traffic summons issued or reason for stop given). Supposedly there was a "grinder" laying on the backseat (again, supposedly belonging to a friend , who had been in the car the previous night). The grinder had some maijuana residue or small amount (?) in it. Cop was instructed by the 2nd officer as to how to write out a desk appearance tkt for marijuana possesion. From my son's brief description, it sounded as if this issuing officer was a new rookie and was being broken in by the other more experienced officer - were they making a practice/training traffic stop? Question: Did they have a legal right to stop him if no traffic infractions were committed and does the subsequent seizure of this "grinder" constitute "illegal search & seizure". Does he stand a good chance of beating this thing or is he wasting his time?

 

[seniorjudge]

The grinder was in plain view so there is no fourth amendment problem.

 

[Old_Fogie]

Yes, but they would not have seen this if they had not stopped him - did they have a right to stop him for no reason? He was on a well travelled main road at the time.
I'm not defending him, but I don't want this on his record if it can be avoided. Believe me, he & I have danced around the rosebush (no physical violence)several times since this & it is not over yet. No matter the outcome, he will not soon dismiss this lightly.

 

[seniorjudge]

I can guarantee you that the cops have a good reason for the stop; you'll hear their version at court.

 

[CdwJava]

My 19 yr old son was driving w/a girlfriend in the car @ approx 5:00 PM. Cops stopped them for no reason (no traffic summons issued or reason for stop given).

No summons or verbal reason provided does NOT mean that there was no reason for the stop. Unless the officer admitted to stopping them for grins and giggles and without articulable suspicion, then one will have to presume the stop was with cause. Now, if it goes to trial and he admits to such a violation of their civil rights, then your son will win AND have grounds for a heck of a 1983 action. But, don't count on this.

Supposedly there was a "grinder" laying on the backseat (again, supposedly belonging to a friend , who had been in the car the previous night).

Plain view = evidence and admissible.

Perhaps you should let your son know that he needs to be a little more careful about who he chooses as friends. Though, I strongly suspect your son is either involved in the same activity or has knowledge of his friend's activity ... provided, of course, you believe the "friend" explanation.

The grinder had some maijuana residue or small amount (?) in it. Cop was instructed by the 2nd officer as to how to write out a desk appearance tkt for marijuana possesion. From my son's brief description, it sounded as if this issuing officer was a new rookie and was being broken in by the other more experienced officer - were they making a practice/training traffic stop?

New officers are trained while under the direct supervision of more veteran, especially trained, Field Training Officers. New officers are not grown in a pod and then hatched into a patrol car.

Question: Did they have a legal right to stop him if no traffic infractions were committed and does the subsequent seizure of this "grinder" constitute "illegal search & seizure".

Unless the officers admit to making the stop without cause, then the stop is lawful.

Does he stand a good chance of beating this thing or is he wasting his time?

He should consult an attorney who can evaluate the case.

- Carl