Arrest, Search, Seizure, Warrant Suppression of evidence

[Dylan33]

I was recently stopped for speeding. I told the officer that I didn't have a license on me, but I gave him my name and license number. He returned to my car and told me that my license was expired. He asked me to get out of the car and he puts the cuffs on me and tells me he's going to pat me down. He additionally said it was for my security and his. Within this time, 4-6 additional units show up for a routine traffic stop. He then says he's going to put me in the back of his vehicle. One of the other officers suggest that he transport me to the station. While I'm sitting in the back of the vehicle, the officer starts to search my vehicle. He pulls my bag out of the car that was sitting on the passenger's seat. He dumps the contents on the hood of his car. Among the items found are: fake ID and a batman item that they are classifying as brass knuckles. I was then transported to the station where I was detained for about 2 1/2 hours. After this time, the arresting officer shows up and takes my statement. I was then arrested and booked for possession of a dangerous weapon. I posted bail. We've gone through arraignment and pre-lim. I'm curious why the officer never indicated what I was being arrested for, nor asked me if it was ok to search my vehicle. But in court he said that he had arrested me for driving with an expired license and he was doing the inventory for the impound. If that was the case, why was I booked for "Possession of a dangerous weapon". Even the officer that was transporting me said that I was being detained until the originating officer completes the tow and returns to the station. Is it possible to have the items found in my bag suppressed?

 

[Michael Wechsler]

I was recently stopped for speeding. I told the officer that I didn't have a license on me, but I gave him my name and license number. He returned to my car and told me that my license was expired. He asked me to get out of the car and he puts the cuffs on me and tells me he's going to pat me down. He additionally said it was for my security and his. Within this time, 4-6 additional units show up for a routine traffic stop. He then says he's going to put me in the back of his vehicle. One of the other officers suggest that he transport me to the station. While I'm sitting in the back of the vehicle, the officer starts to search my vehicle. He pulls my bag out of the car that was sitting on the passenger's seat. He dumps the contents on the hood of his car. Among the items found are: fake ID and a batman item that they are classifying as brass knuckles. I was then transported to the station where I was detained for about 2 1/2 hours. After this time, the arresting officer shows up and takes my statement. I was then arrested and booked for possession of a dangerous weapon. I posted bail. We've gone through arraignment and pre-lim. I'm curious why the officer never indicated what I was being arrested for, nor asked me if it was ok to search my vehicle. But in court he said that he had arrested me for driving with an expired license and he was doing the inventory for the impound. If that was the case, why was I booked for "Possession of a dangerous weapon". Even the officer that was transporting me said that I was being detained until the originating officer completes the tow and returns to the station. Is it possible to have the items found in my bag suppressed?

Are you sure that there are no charges against you for driving without a driver's license? Did you get a summons for it?

This isn't my primary area of law but it is not unreasonable to take inventory prior to impounding the vehicle -- and the bag was in plain view, not in the trunk or concealed elsewhere. I found this citation in a circuit court decision which might provide additional insight into the rationale behind the rules and I don't think it helps you.

"The general rule is . . . that warrantless searches without consent are per se unreasonable and thus invalid under the Fourth Amendment, subject to a few well-defined exceptions." Girardi v. Commonwealth, 221 Va. 459, 463, 270 S.E.2d 743, 745 (1980) (citing Cady v. Dombroski, 413 U.S. 433, 439 (1973)). "[O]ne of the recognized exceptions to the warrant requirement is the inventory search, as approved in South Dakota v. Opperman, 428 U.S. 364 (1976)." Id. at 463, 270 S.E.2d at 746. This Court adopted the three-pronged Opperman test in Servis v. Commonwealth, 6 Va. App. 507, 371 S.E.2d 156 (1988), holding that "a routine inventory search of a lawfully impounded vehicle conducted pursuant to standard police procedure is reasonable under the fourth amendment unless it is a `pretext concealing an investigatory motive.'" Id. at 521, 371 S.E.2d at 163 (quoting Opperman, 428 U.S. at 376). See also King, 39 Va. App. at 310, 572 S.E.2d at 520.