LEO's is this true?

[ilbob]

if you speeding, even 1 MPH over the limit thats good enough. if you are driving a few mph under the limit, they call that suspicious.

some kind of mechincal issue with your vehicle. thats enough reason.

swerve to avoid a pothole? thats good cause.

once they stop you there are all kinds of paperwork issues they can go for. insurance, licenses, etc.

the cops did not create this situation. the greed of various levels of government for traffic infraction revenue did.

[solanoshooter]

Did anybody else take note of the recent idiotic U.S. Supreme Court decision barring car interior searches incident to arrest, absent reasonable and articulatable suspicion that there is contraband in the car? This is a profound change from our previous practice of "anything within reach, before or after the arrest." I see the main effects as 1.) more guns and dope stay on the streets with the crooks, and 2.) police reports have to be a bit longer to do the search incident to arrest. This decision, coupled with the 9th Circuit decision arising from an Oregon State Police tow of an arrestee vehicle that towing an arrestee's car is supposed to be a service, not punitive (such a dumb decision), does not serve public safety in any way.

Idiotic about sums it up.

[J-cat]

Link please.

[CSDGuy]

Did anybody else take note of the recent idiotic U.S. Supreme Court decision barring car interior searches incident to arrest, absent reasonable and articulatable suspicion that there is contraband in the car? This is a profound change from our previous practice of "anything within reach, before or after the arrest." I see the main effects as 1.) more guns and dope stay on the streets with the crooks, and 2.) police reports have to be a bit longer to do the search incident to arrest. This decision, coupled with the 9th Circuit decision arising from an Oregon State Police tow of an arrestee vehicle that towing an arrestee's car is supposed to be a service, not punitive (such a dumb decision), does not serve public safety in any way.

The way I understand the recent SCOTUS decision is that a car interior search incidental to an arrest can only be done if there's RS to believe that evidence related to the crime that the arrestee is being arrested for is in the car. Or get a warrant for the search. If the car is going to be impounded anyway, let the inventory of said vehicle find the stuff...

I'd think of it like this: "Make darned sure that you've got your I's dotted and the T's crossed when you're doing your search because you don't want your collected evidence to be tossed out by the court later...

[eltee]

There is the phenomenon known as the "dirty search." It is a search that both the suspect and the cop knows will be invalidated, but since the dope cannot be returned, it is off the street. If it is a sizeable amount, the suspect may have some "'splainin'" to do to the ones who fronted him the dope. That may result in a dope dealer off the street. I neither condone or recommend this practice, and there is some legal slight of hand that must be used to implement it without risking disciplinary and/or criminal charges but any cop on the job more than two weeks in any metropolitan area with a drug problem will tell you it happens.

Bear in mind, a search that will inevitably be invalidated is not the same as a totally illegal search under color of authority. You have to exercise some gamesmanship, like getting a prostitute to say the magic words, but you avoid criminal misconduct and entrapment, etc. Either way, most drug and prostitute pinches get tossed or diverted anyway.

[DNA]

Actually, to the below referenced ruling, it only applies to a very few instances. The case that got the ball rolling was essentially, guy has warrant (or something to that effect), LEOs go to guy's home to try to pick up guy. As LEOs are at the door, guy rolls up, parked said vehicle, walks to LEO and says "hi". LEO takes guy into custody, plops him in back seat of cruiser (cuffed) and proceeds to toss the vehicle for goodies. LEO find's goodies, trial goes to court and the rest is history.

This decision applies really, only to search of the vehicle after susp has left said vehicle. Now if suspect is removed from vehicle, it's still game on .

As far as punitive impound of a vehicle, go see 14602.6 cvc If you're unlicensed or suspended, your car is now mine. For 30 days too.

Dan

Did anybody else take note of the recent idiotic U.S. Supreme Court decision barring car interior searches incident to arrest, absent reasonable and articulatable suspicion that there is contraband in the car? This is a profound change from our previous practice of "anything within reach, before or after the arrest." I see the main effects as 1.) more guns and dope stay on the streets with the crooks, and 2.) police reports have to be a bit longer to do the search incident to arrest. This decision, coupled with the 9th Circuit decision arising from an Oregon State Police tow of an arrestee vehicle that towing an arrestee's car is supposed to be a service, not punitive (such a dumb decision), does not serve public safety in any way.