New Search and Seizure Law

[tha joker]

This is in reference to a recent US Supreme Court Case and means a drastic change in the law for law enforcement. Frankly, it has pissed a lot of cops off.

The supreme court has stated in the past that any search conducted absent a warrant were per se unconstitutional. There were several exceptions to this, one of which was the "motor vehicle exception". Up until recently, the supreme court had found that any police officer who arrests the occupant of a motor vehicle had the right to conduct a search of the entire passenger compartment incident to the arrest without a warrant. This allowed the police to seize any evidence of a crime they found and present it in court. This stems from the US Supreme Court case Belton vs. New York.

Recently, based on a case out of Arizona, the supreme court ruled in a 5-4 decision, with Clarence Thomas surprisingly splitting from his conservative counterparts, that the police could no longer conduct a search incident to arrest of a motor vehicle after arresting an occupant without having a search warrant.

What does this mean? It will be much more difficult for law enforcement in general to conduct a search of your car. There are still times where the police may legally conduct a search of your car without a warrant. They may conduct a search without a warrant if they have probable cause to believe your vehicle contains "evidence of a crime", if you give your consent, if they conduct an inventory of the contents of your car prior to towing it, or if they have "reasonable suspicion" that an occupant is armed or dangerous, which allows a "frisk" of the passenger compartment. A "frisk" would be a limited search for weapons and only in areas that could reasonably conceal a weapon.

If you have questions, let me know.

 

[SpyWizard]

inventory before the tow... that's the one they'll use..

 

[gaw31]

just when i think i cant stand another blood sucking lawyer........... lawyers like you totally redeem your profession!!! lol!!!!

 

[JumpBallWinner]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if they arrest you for anything, your car/truck will be towed. They aren't just going to leave it there on the side of the road, correct?

So they can still take an "inventory" of the items in the vehicle before towing, hence pretty much always having the reason to go through and search after an arrest?

I missing anything here? I thought this was pretty much the way it always worked before?

I have a friend who works on a local dept in a somewhat small rural county. He invited me on a nightshift ride along, and during it he did a few traffic stops and found drugs in one of the cars. He's a K9 officer who keeps a dog in the back of the car. I asked him "what would you do if you knew without question for whatever reason that the person had something illegal in their car, but your dog didn't give you a hit on anything when you were trying to get probable cause, and they refused to let you search?" His answer was "Any traffic violation in this state is an arrestable offense. So say I pulled them over for a tag light being out, I could just take them to jail for that and then search them before the car was towed."

Seems like a way the state legislature figured out to always be able to search a vehicle if they wanted to regardless of probable cause etc.

 

[needmassnow]

Don't stop on the side of the road. Pull into a Walgreens, or gas station and legally park. Then they cannot tow your vehicle, hence, no inventory search.

 

[princeshock]

What stops them from searching your car or towing it at wall greens or any place?

 

[hwydopehound]

Don't stop on the side of the road. Pull into a Walgreens, or gas station and legally park. Then they cannot tow your vehicle, hence, no inventory search.

Yes they can tow your vehicle. The new Az v. Gant case actually is in reference to an "inventory search" of the vehicle. what happened was cops were finding drugs after arresting people for violation they didn't normally arrest for. For instance, if someone denied consent to search they would arrest them on the traffic ticket reason they stopped the person for(perfectly legal in many states, mine included) and would then search the car incident to arrest. This can no longer be done depending on how your Attorney General reads and interprets the law. I don't have the issue because I never did that to begin with. I'll either call a judge and get a warrant based on what indicators of criminal activity I observed in my interview, call a dog or get consent. All that assuming I don't get probable cause to begin with.

That said, it has pissed a lot of (lazy) cops off. Not me, because if I want to get in your car I will do it legally because I will know when you are dirty. I mostly don't care about steroids because I would use them if they were legal. Don't really care about misd. weed either. If it's not a felony I don't fuck with it normally. Except dui.

Oh, princeshock-nothing. So be nice and don't pull a half mile down the road to your house or a walgreens. I actuallly had one towed OUT OF A GARAGE last week because the guy traveled the 3/4 mile to his house. I would have let someone come get that car had he NOT pulled that shit with me. But, he knew he was drunk and thought he could get away with it.

here are pulled quotes from the case law...


In an opinion delivered by Justice Stevens, the Supreme Court held that police may search the passenger compartment of a vehicle incident to a recent occupant’s arrest only if it is reasonable to believe that the arrestee might access the vehicle at the time of the search or that the vehicle contains evidence of the offense of arrest.
Justice Scalia wrote a concurring opinion, "In my view we should simply abandon the Belton-Thornton charade of officer safety and overrule those cases. I would hold that a vehicle search incident to arrest is ipso facto “reasonable” only when the object of the search is evidence of the crime for which the arrest was made, or of another crime that the officer has probable cause to believe occurred."


what happened and the lamens terms...

cop stops shitbag driving down the road.. shitbag pulls into his driveway and starts walking away.. multiple shitbags on scene.. cops detain all shitbags, including the driver, and then search the drivers car.. shitbag's attorneys claim that they had no reason to search his car because the traffic violation had nothing to do with what was inside his car.. courts agreed and now you have az v. gant......... had he called a dog or gotten consent the case would not even be here.. but, he pushed the limits of the law and made bad caselaw for ALL OF US(me included) and lost a case on some cocaine(a good bit, actually-enough to charge him with poss. for sale) and a gun.. basically, if you cannot articulate why you were searching the car and why you belive it contained illegal contraband, the case will be thrown out...

 

[needmassnow]

Yes they can tow your vehicle. The new Az v. Gant case actually is in reference to an "inventory search" of the vehicle. what happened was cops were finding drugs after arresting people for violation they didn't normally arrest for. For instance, if someone denied consent to search they would arrest them on the traffic ticket reason they stopped the person for(perfectly legal in many states, mine included) and would then search the car incident to arrest. This can no longer be done depending on how your Attorney General reads and interprets the law. I don't have the issue because I never did that to begin with. I'll either call a judge and get a warrant based on what indicators of criminal activity I observed in my interview, call a dog or get consent. All that assuming I don't get probable cause to begin with.

That said, it has pissed a lot of (lazy) cops off. Not me, because if I want to get in your car I will do it legally because I will know when you are dirty. I mostly don't care about steroids because I would use them if they were legal. Don't really care about misd. weed either. If it's not a felony I don't fuck with it normally. Except dui.

Oh, princeshock-nothing. So be nice and don't pull a half mile down the road to your house or a walgreens. I actuallly had one towed OUT OF A GARAGE last week because the guy traveled the 3/4 mile to his house. I would have let someone come get that car had he NOT pulled that shit with me. But, he knew he was drunk and thought he could get away with it.

here are pulled quotes from the case law...


In an opinion delivered by Justice Stevens, the Supreme Court held that police may search the passenger compartment of a vehicle incident to a recent occupant’s arrest only if it is reasonable to believe that the arrestee might access the vehicle at the time of the search or that the vehicle contains evidence of the offense of arrest.
Justice Scalia wrote a concurring opinion, "In my view we should simply abandon the Belton-Thornton charade of officer safety and overrule those cases. I would hold that a vehicle search incident to arrest is ipso facto “reasonable” only when the object of the search is evidence of the crime for which the arrest was made, or of another crime that the officer has probable cause to believe occurred."


what happened and the lamens terms...

cop stops shitbag driving down the road.. shitbag pulls into his driveway and starts walking away.. multiple shitbags on scene.. cops detain all shitbags, including the driver, and then search the drivers car.. shitbag's attorneys claim that they had no reason to search his car because the traffic violation had nothing to do with what was inside his car.. courts agreed and now you have az v. gant......... had he called a dog or gotten consent the case would not even be here.. but, he pushed the limits of the law and made bad caselaw for ALL OF US(me included) and lost a case on some cocaine(a good bit, actually-enough to charge him with poss. for sale) and a gun.. basically, if you cannot articulate why you were searching the car and why you belive it contained illegal contraband, the case will be thrown out...

Can you say ROOOOOOOOOOOOOKIE! You are probably some highway patrol 'specialist'. When you come work the road for a few years, then we can talk. I don't know what your department's policy is, but if you are legally parked in a public parking lot and are getting 15'd for no DL or something similar, you CAN NOT tow the vehicle. If they stop on the side of the road, you can, hence the inventory 'search'. Unless you are forfeiting the car because it was used in the commission of a felony, you are not towing a legally parked vehicle from a traffic stop.

Your notion of "I know when he's dirty" is horse shit. If you are 99% sure that the guy you stopped has 100 kilo's of cocaine in the trunk, and you don't have a dog available, and he doesn't give you consent and/or you don't smell the odor of marijuana/smoked crack/smoked Oxycontin, you are not getting in that car unless you are are arresting him for something and have grounds to tow the vehicle.

And your notion of "indicators of criminal activity during my interview" screams new-cop bullshit. Every shitbag you talk to gives you "indicators of criminal activity". How about the 20 year old black guy with dreads, gold teeth, driving a 100k masserati with more jewelry on than you could afford in your lifetime, yet he has no job. I'd say that is an "indicator of criminal activity", yet, that does not qualify as PC to get in the car. Reasonable suspicion does not allow you to search a vehicle. You can't even conduct a terry stop of an individual anymore unless you are able to articulate why you feel that person is currently armed when you patted them down.

Leave that traffic-stop agency you work for and get with a real agency and then you'll sound like you know what you are talking about.

 

[needmassnow]

What stops them from searching your car or towing it at wall greens or any place?

It's not that pulling into a walgreens stops them from searching or towing your vehicle, because it doesn't. But let's say you are pulled over and your DL is suspended (which is/can be a criminal offense in your state, depending on the circumstances). So the officer decides you are going to "take the ride" to jail for the suspended DL. The new case law indicates that you cannot search a vehicle incident to arrest if no other evidence of the crime you are arresting the driver can be found in the vehicle. Obviously, if you are arrested for a criminal traffic offense, the officer is not going to find any further evidence of that traffic offense by searching the vehicle, so under the new case-law he can not search the vehicle.

HOWEVER, if you stop on the side of the road, or are not stopped somewhere where it is legal to leave your car, the officer may tow your vehicle and conduct an "inventory" of the vehicle. Anything found during the inventory of the vehicle is admissible in court (i.e can be used against you). Now, if you stopped in a walgreens or public parking lot and are being arrested for a traffic offense, the officer can not tow your car just because he wants to fuck you. Unless he has additional probable cause to conduct a search which could be the odor of marijuana, a drug K-9 hitting on your vehicle, or contraband in plain-view, he will not get into your vehicle without consent.

Hence, the notion of legally parking before pulling over for a traffic stop keeps you safe from the "search incident to arrest" clause, but will not prevent the officer from searching your vehicle for any of the other aforementioned probable cause indicators.

 

[doublebicep]

Not me, because if I want to get in your car I will do it legally because I will know when you are dirty.

How about if you have probable cause. I don't see how your "wants" are relavant. It sounds like a bit of a power trip. Upholding the law has nothing to do with your wants.

 

[Cutiebaby]

just when i think i cant stand another blood sucking lawyer........... lawyers like you totally redeem your profession!!! lol!!!!

I don't think he is a lawyer, though not totally sure.

Last time I knew he is a jobless former cop. Though again, things may have changed.

 

[hwydopehound]

How about if you have probable cause. I don't see how your "wants" are relavant. It sounds like a bit of a power trip. Upholding the law has nothing to do with your wants.

Search warrant. It's about reasonable suspicion and probably cause. If you can give indicators of criminal activity and articulate how based on your training and experience you believe there is contraband in the vehicle the judge will grant you a search warrant.. Has happened with me a couple of times.

Needmassnow is telling me I can search a vehicle if I tow it, HE IS WRONG.. I don't know why you suspect I'm a rookie when it's actually the total opposite. In regards to your thug w/ jewelry, nope thats not pc and thats not relativey close to what I meant by indicators of criminal activity. You are either a shitty defense attorney or a jobless cop-not sure which one yet. I can tell you, sir, that you have no idea of what you speak.

PS, I am not a highway specialist, I work traffic focusing on dui and drug trafficking enforcement :-D... I don't know why you are so pissed, I'm just clarifying the law. No longer can cops search a vehicle for "inventory" purposes. You may search the "lunge area" if you believe the crook has intent to do you bodily harm or has weapons, but that is it...

 

[needmassnow]

Search warrant. It's about reasonable suspicion and probably cause. If you can give indicators of criminal activity and articulate how based on your training and experience you believe there is contraband in the vehicle the judge will grant you a search warrant.. Has happened with me a couple of times.

Needmassnow is telling me I can search a vehicle if I tow it, HE IS WRONG.. I don't know why you suspect I'm a rookie when it's actually the total opposite. In regards to your thug w/ jewelry, nope thats not pc and thats not relativey close to what I meant by indicators of criminal activity. You are either a shitty defense attorney or a jobless cop-not sure which one yet. I can tell you, sir, that you have no idea of what you speak.

PS, I am not a highway specialist, I work traffic focusing on dui and drug trafficking enforcement :-D... I don't know why you are so pissed, I'm just clarifying the law. No longer can cops search a vehicle for "inventory" purposes. You may search the "lunge area" if you believe the crook has intent to do you bodily harm or has weapons, but that is it...

You obviously have reading comprehension issues. When you tow someone's vehicle, you are taking care custody and control of that vehicle. You are responsible for inventorying that vehicle for two purposes. First, is safety to the person towing the vehicle and the general public. If there is a meth lab in the trunk, or TNT under the front seat, it is your responsibility to not allow someone to take control of that vehicle until it is rendered safe. Second, it is to alleviate liability from the department if someone should claim they had a million dollars in the trunk, and now it is magically gone when they retrieve their vehicle from the tow yard. So to completely contradict your idiotic statement, not only do you have a RIGHT to inventory a vehicle if you are going to tow it, you have the RESPONSIBILITY to inventory it.

If you re-read my post regarding the thug with jewelry example, you will see that you AGREE with me. So to claim that I have no idea what I am talking about is negating everything you have said as well.

Since I have disproved just about every point you have made, please explain to me how I "have no idea of what I speak," as you so eloquently phrased it.

No longer can cops search a vehicle for "inventory" purposes. You may search the "lunge area" if you believe the crook has intent to do you bodily harm or has weapons, but that is it...

WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG!!! Infact, the new ruling is saying the complete opposite. The only thing that has changed is that you can no longer blindly search someone's vehicle incident to arrest if no other evidence could reasonably be found inside the vehicle that pertains to the original arrest. I'll give you another example so hopefully if you ever get hired again as a police officer, you won't put yourself in a position to be sued for violating someone's civil rights (since it is quite obvious there is no way you can be currently employed as a police officer and be so misinformed).

You stop someone for running a red light. You run their name and they come back with an outstanding warrant for FTA (failure to appear) for theft. You arrest them for the outstanding warrant. Obviously, there can be no other evidence of the warrant inside the vehicle. Before this supreme court ruling, you were allowed to search the vehicle incident to arrest. The new ruling says that you can NOT search that vehicle based on the set of circumstances I have presented to you.

Okay, now the guy is in handcuffs and in the back of your patrol car. His car is parked in the left lane of the roadway. You have to call for a rotation tow to have his vehicle removed. Now, you may inventory the vehicle. This includes trunk, glove box, under the seats, etc. If you find a kilo of cocaine in the trunk, guess what; he is now charged with cocaine possession.

Read the ruling again my ignorant wannabe police officer. This ruling by no means precludes officers from conducting inventories of vehicles they are towing

 

[needmassnow]

Needmassnow is telling me I can search a vehicle if I tow it, HE IS WRONG.. I don't know why you suspect I'm a rookie when it's actually the total opposite.

Now I don't even believe you are a rookie. I don't even believe you are a cop after a statement like this. Read my post above and you will see that this new ruling has NOTHING to do with precluding officers from conducting an inventory of a vehicle when towing a vehicle. I'm not mad dude, I just hate it when morons spread misinformation on the internet, and then people run with it like it is gospel.

 

[TONY83]

hwydopehound....hwydopehound....

Ur a cop obviously, what are u doing on this board? Discussing how to use steroids, ..
What pisses me of is cops that do illegal shit and act like they are all clean. No offence but I had to say what I just said. Let's be honest most cops are corrupt, WTF... Messing with steroid users, who are just normal people trying to look good. Whenever it comes to drug lords, organized crime, they are scared to death and pussies, but when they catch a guy with a bottle of test they act all tough, again no offence, but F... Cops, they the real criminals

 

[kx250rider]

So be nice and don't pull a half mile down the road to your house or a walgreens. I actuallly had one towed OUT OF A GARAGE last week because the guy traveled the 3/4 mile to his house.

I might get in trouble then, because I normally NEVER pull over on the highway. I drive at the speed limit to the next exit, then pull into a safe place. Too many cops & civilians killed on the California freeways while fooling around on the side of the road answering questions or waiting for a ticket. I'd rather be alive & jailed by an angry cop than in a coffin! I made a mistake on the Pacific Coast Highway a few months ago by pulling over right away in a spot that I thought was wide enough, but still several cars swerved and screeched their brakes, only inches from the cop and me. The Los Angeles County sheriff's deputy had me there for 20 minutes of radioing, and I asked him if it's OK to pull around the corner, and he said NO. Next time, I'm not asking; I'm just going to proceed to where I think it's safe. Every time I've done that before, incluiding 6 months ago by the CA Highway patrol when I drove 5 miles on the 118 freeway with her behind me, there's been no problem. I get pulled over constantly because I drive a Toyota Diesel, and the police keep thinking it's a gas engine with some kind of smoke problem. I never get a ticket though. Just questions.

I believe there is a law on the books in California, allowing any driver to refuse to pull over if they think there's somthething fishy about the cop. The law says you can drive to the nearest police station to stop, or to any well-lighted parking lot with plenty of people, if you feel it's safer. They can't, as I understand, charge you with any crime for failing to pull over on those grounds. But once you've voluntarily chosen a place to stop, all bets are off.

Charles