That is exactly what I was basing my answers on was thought innocent passenger getting out at destination. Complying to order to get back in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alty

....How are cops supposed to arrest guilty parties if their hands are tied?

---

You are joking, right?

Right answer: by doing their job without violating the Constitution.

Wrong answer: whatever it takes, including but not limited to:

• unlawful searches and seizures:
• getting confessions by torture and intimidation;
• planted evidence;
• etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AK lawyer

right answer: by doing their job without violating the Constitution.

wrong answer: whatever it takes, including but not limited to:

• unlawful searches and seizures:
• getting confessions by torture and intimidation;
• planted evidence;
• etc.

---

That is what I was getting at about the difference between the law and some police procedures that go beyond what they should be bound to. Many cops rough up people and so forth to get what they want.
My state is one of the 29 states that seat belts are a secondary law but that doesn't stop police from making up reasons to stop you and going beyond the plain view law as well, and as you stated planting evidence, etc...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joypulv

Being indignant about the legality of the search and a dollar will get you a cup of coffee. If you want help, you have to be forthcoming with every little tiny detail. We don't know you! What mIore could you ask for? FREE HELP!
Tell us how much you had on you, where it was when they found it, what your friend's felony is, if they found anything on him, and whether or not you have a record.

---

he's on probation for drugs I have a clean record, we were not blurped by the siren no lights it was day time. Weed was in my pocket

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by guam707

he's on probation for drugs I have a clean record, we were not blurped by the siren no lights it was day time. Weed was in my pocket

---

he didn't get a ticket for the seatbelt which was supposed to be the reason why they rolled up on us

Your state is primary seat belt law, they can stop you for that but it is up to them what they want to ticket for and what they are willing to let slide.

It is obvious that the officers must know this person, and know he is on probation. Many officers, if this is the case, find a reason to stop them driving,

Once you got out of the car, you became fair game to a pat down, and even to empty pockets if they felt something in pocket. I will say this search would hold up in court as valid,

The issue of legal, vs illegal, they are all legal, until a court rules they are illegal. So you hire an attorney and dispute the stop, and the search.

Fr Chuck is right ---- with all the additional information that's what it all adds up to

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AK lawyer

...
If the police have cause to pull the driver over, they can search anyone in it for their own protection.
....

---

I must admit that I was incorrect here too.

They must have a reasonable suspicion that the person(s) is/are threats to them. I should have reviewed Terry v. Ohio (which I have linked elsewhere in this thread), before I wrote that.

Wow why is it so difficult to answer questions? AGAIN - How much weed did they find on you, and did they find anything on him?
IF you decide that your PD isn't going to help much and you can afford a private lawyer, you are going to find out that arguing the legality of the search is not isolated from the case as a whole. I can think of at least 4 or 5 more questions. If you don't want to say anything here, please say so so I can go away.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joypulv

Wow why is it so difficult to answer questions? AGAIN - How much weed did they find on you, and did they find anything on him?
IF you decide that your PD isn't going to help much and you can afford a private lawyer, you are going to find out that arguing the legality of the search is not isolated from the case as a whole. ....

---

Really? How do you figure? You are really convinced that if they only found one joint on OP it can be an unlawful search, but if they found a pound on him maye it's lawful? Enough to make it obvious that he had something in his pocket: I can see that, but otherwise?

And, similarly, what does it matter whether they found anything on the driver?

Do your 4 or 5 other questions include:

• What time of night was it?
• What color was the car?
• Are you left handed or right?
• What race are you and the driver?

Is Cadoor a community in Solano County, California? I don't see Cadoor on the map.

AK, I take it that when you are trying to get someone off you say 'don't tell me how much weed was in your pocket, and whether the driver was found with any drugs on him, because the court will never suspect a hand off during that time it took the cops to get you to stop the car or even just be aware they were there, and the cops will never claim they could see a bulge which could be a weapon blah blah. The judge cares about your Constitutional rights only, and will even take an extra 30 minutes just hearing various precedents, instead of the usual 3 minutes takingapleaandbangingthegavelandsayingnextcase.'

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joypulv

AK, I take it that when you are trying to get someone off you say 'don't tell me how much weed was in your pocket, and whether the driver was found with any drugs on him, because the court will never suspect a hand off during that time it took the cops to get you to stop the car or even just be aware they were there, and the cops will never claim they could see a bulge which could be a weapon blah blah. The judge cares about your Constitutional rights only, and will even take an extra 30 minutes just hearing various precedents, instead of the usual 3 minutes takingapleaandbangingthegavelandsayingnextcase.'

---

Unlike on this forum, if I were defending OP I would want to know everything.

But for us to be effective here, we should be able to separate the wheat from the chaff.

In my opinion, a suspected hand-off would not be pertinent to the Fourth Amendment issues which OP has posed. If they suspect one, I believe they still need cause to interrogate the passenger, and a reasonable suspicion regarding their safety to search that passenger.

Hello again,

The legal advice I offer doesn't change whether the guy is guilty or not. Yours shouldn't either.

excon

I don't mean to be arguing at cross purposes. I guess (sort of) that I shouldn't be trying to get every fact on this forum. Do you think a PD will be willing to fight for him? He might have tried to when he first started, but if he has the typical case load he expects each one to take a few minutes or plea out. So what would a private lawyer cost in labor hours, do you think, if you think he has a pretty good case?

This is my point about police procedure vs the court.

Hello again, joy:

Quote:

---

The legal advice I offer doesn't change whether the guy is guilty or not. Yours shouldn't either.

---

Quote:

---

Do you think a PD will be willing to fight for him?

---

I think GOOD public defenders are just like me. They fight for their clients whether they're GUILTY or NOT.

Why should that make a difference??

Excon

An overburdened PD weighs the odds and tries to get you to take a plea - you know that!
'Goodness' flew out the window a long time ago.
I want to know the odds of winning this with a PD, and with a private lawyer.
But not just on Constitutional grounds. On state drug laws. Because it MIGHT be important.

Hello again, joy:

Quote:

---

Do you think a PD will be willing to fight for him?

---

Quote:

---

An overburdened PD weighs the odds and tries to get you to take a plea

---

The responsibility for ones defense rests on the defendant - NOT his lawyer. If a defendant is willing to lay down for his lawyer, then he is. But, if he ISN'T, the public defender is OBLIGATED by law and the ethics of his profession to defend his client to the best of his ability...

I'm not saying this happens as a matter of course.. It doesn't. MOST people DO lay down. But when somebody doesn't, and if he's AGGRESSIVE about obtaining his Constitutional rights, he CAN get them...

My advice here IS, and ALWAYS has been, to BE aggressive when seeking your rights...

Excon