DWB ( Driving While Black)

[lukertin]

Officer friendly was black.... (I am white....) and was almighty curious what I was doing in 'this neighborhood'...... He wanted to search my car, but I told him he had no probable cause, I didn't feel like wasting the time, and didn't need someone tossing all the stuff around in my car. (not that there was much.....) He suggested that he could hold me there while he had the dogs brought in...... Resigned to my fate, I told him to Go for it. I then rolled up the window, turned on the radio, and lit up a cigarette prepared to wait..... He went back to his car, was on the radio for a few minutes...... then pulled out, and left.......

Unfortunately, refusing to consent to a car search can be grounds for probable cause to search your car.

 

Go figure that one out, eh?

[Aurielius]

Officer friendly was black.... (I am white....) and was almighty curious what I was doing in 'this neighborhood'...... He wanted to search my car, but I told him he had no probable cause, I didn't feel like wasting the time, and didn't need someone tossing all the stuff around in my car. (not that there was much.....) He suggested that he could hold me there while he had the dogs brought in...... Resigned to my fate, I told him to Go for it. I then rolled up the window, turned on the radio, and lit up a cigarette prepared to wait..... He went back to his car, was on the radio for a few minutes...... then pulled out, and left.......

Unfortunately, refusing to consent to a car search can be grounds for probable cause to search your car.

 

Go figure that one out, eh?

Thankfully not in Pennsylvania, they tried that one and it was shot down in state supreme court several years back.

[HeyYou]

Not in michigan either. Refusing to submit to a search is NOT probable cause. Else, any cop on the street could frisk you whenever he felt like it, because you refused to allow it. Catch 22?

[Lisnpuppy]

@Marxist---your cynicism and paranoia never cease to amaze and disappoint me.

 

I think perhaps we have strayed off topic?

[Marxist ßastard]

@Marxist---your cynicism and paranoia never cease to amaze and disappoint me.

 

I think perhaps we have strayed off topic?

Um, what? I haven't posted in this thread recently.

[lukertin]

Not in michigan either. Refusing to submit to a search is NOT probable cause. Else, any cop on the street could frisk you whenever he felt like it, because you refused to allow it. Catch 22?

Stop and frisk is analyzed under a different legal standard than a car search broseph

[HeyYou]

Not in michigan either. Refusing to submit to a search is NOT probable cause. Else, any cop on the street could frisk you whenever he felt like it, because you refused to allow it. Catch 22?

Stop and frisk is analyzed under a different legal standard than a car search broseph

 

They still need probable cause. Simply telling them "no, you may not search my car without a warrant", does NOT constitute probable cause. That's an exercise of your legal rights. If some legislature somewhere has bypassed that, then the citizens of that state need to take it up with their representatives, as it gives the police the right to search your car, whenever they want, without any valid reason.

[Aurielius]

Not in michigan either. Refusing to submit to a search is NOT probable cause. Else, any cop on the street could frisk you whenever he felt like it, because you refused to allow it. Catch 22?

Stop and frisk is analyzed under a different legal standard than a car search broseph

 

They still need probable cause. Simply telling them "no, you may not search my car without a warrant", does NOT constitute probable cause. That's an exercise of your legal rights. If some legislature somewhere has bypassed that, then the citizens of that state need to take it up with their representatives, as it gives the police the right to search your car, whenever they want, without any valid reason.

After having a conversation with a friend who is a criminal attorney in NJ, he informed me that in NJ that defense won't fly, just one more reason not to visit (the Planet) New Jersey. :confused:

[hexorcist]

<snip>

He suggested that he could hold me there while he had the dogs brought in...... Resigned to my fate, I told him to Go for it. I then rolled up the window, turned on the radio, and lit up a cigarette prepared to wait..... He went back to his car, was on the radio for a few minutes...... then pulled out, and left.......

<snip>

 

This doesn't fly in Illinois. They can't detain you there and wait for a dog longer than the amount of time it would take to run your tags and write a ticket, unless you were pulled over for a drug related crime that the officer would be witness to. Something similar happened in 2004 (guesstimate on year) and the Illinois Supreme Court said waiting for the dog to arrive was unconstitutional for a speeding ticket - the vote was 4-2.

[Marxist ßastard]

After having a conversation with a friend who is a criminal attorney in NJ, he informed me that in NJ that defense won't fly

I would not want to get represented by your friend, whoever he is – NJ all but forbids searches during traffic stops. State v. Carty says officers cannot even ask for consent during a traffic stop without a reasonable and articulable suspicion you're involved in a crime unrelated to the traffic stop. (And "acting nervous" explicitly cannot be the basis for suspicion.) And then if you refuse consent, NJ enforces a standard more strict than probable cause: The officer must believe that there is a public danger, or that you will destroy evidence if the officer gets a warrant.

 

In any case, nobody can ever benefit from consenting to a search. It's silly to voluntarily waive your constitutional rights because you think they might get violated.