Search of your vehicle

[Trigger Time]

This is generic information, not legal advice to you or anyone else.


Only with probable cause.


Relax and wait. STFU while you're at it. If they ask for consent, decide whether to give it. If they don't ask for consent - because they believe they have PC - then there's not much you can do at the scene. Actually, I can't think of anything constructive you can do at the scene if the officer believes they have PC.


Decide whether I wanted to consent or not, or give limited consent.

"Dude, I don't have much time, so you can look under the seats and stuff if you want." You do have the power to limit the scope of the search.

Mostly, I'd politely decline.


Then, if you are unconstitutionally searched, you STFU and call a lawyer when it is over.

I think this is very bad advice. I've never heard of a limited search. Once you give them access to the vehicle then the whole thing is their baby to search.
im sure you'll show me some legal Mumbo jumbo proving me wrong but if they're in they're in.

 

[Tactically Fat]

Because it's pot, or because it's illegal? I've never smoked pot either, but in college it was impossible to not have at least one friend (or in my case fraternity brothers) that didn't smoke the stuff.

Both because it's pot and because it's illegal. Even if it were legal in IN, I'd still have no friends that smoked pot.

No friends in college that partook, either. Co-workers and acquaintances, yes. But not friends.

 

[T.Lex]

I think this is very bad advice.

Because reading comprehension. It isn't advice, it is information.

I've never heard of a limited search.

Have you heard of foie gras? Wave-particle duality? The Galilean moons? Instantiating a class? If you haven't, it doesn't mean they don't exist.

Once you give them access to the vehicle then the whole thing is their baby to search.
im sure you'll show me some legal Mumbo jumbo proving me wrong but if they're in they're in.

Not sure if legal opinions are what you mean by mumbo jumbo, but ... Walter v. United States, 447 U.S. 649, 657 (1980) (ruling that consent searches are limited by the terms of authorization).

ETA:
If you limit the scope, but in the process of that limited consent-search, they see something that gives them probable cause (plain view), then that was pretty stupid to give consent, even if it was limited.

Re-reading my post, I'm pretty sure I said:

Mostly, I'd politely decline.

That means I'd decline consent completely. In case I was unclear.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Both because it's pot and because it's illegal. Even if it were legal in IN, I'd still have no friends that smoked pot.

No friends in college that partook, either. Co-workers and acquaintances, yes. But not friends.

Ok, you don't. I believe you.... but it IS odd.

 

[Tactically Fat]

Ok, you don't. I believe you.... but it IS odd.

What can I say? I choose wisely.

 

[Kutnupe14]

What can I say? I choose wisely.

Being wise, and making sound decisions, is odd too.

 

[IndyGunSafety]

I am not going to debate the cases, the courts have already done that. I am trying to keep fellow INGO members from taking some bad advice.....

Opie I think they meant EXIT the vehicle and roll up the windows on your way out. I said that the same way on Garrison's radio show once and they misinterpreted what I was saying. They thought I meant upon command of the officer, roll up the windows and lock the doors and ignore his command. That's not a good idea.

The other problem with rolling up windows and locking doors is how they react to you moving your hands around where they can't see them. I did it once with no problem, but it still worries me.

 

[Tactically Fat]

Being wise, and making sound decisions, is odd too.

Again....sadly.

 

[Pocketman]

Perhaps not totally within the scope of the OP, but if the officer has cause to impound the vehicle, the scenario changes.

 

[HoughMade]

I'm sure it's been said- TLDR

Personally, I would not consent to a search...even though I have nothing to hide. I would make my lack of consent clear, but polite.

If an officer insists that he may search, I will not get in his way- he will be doing it without consent and under protest, but I will never present a physical obstacle to a search and I will obey commands. It is foolhardy to try to "fight" this in the field.

I will then deal with the matter in court. They had the advantage out and about, I feel like I have the advantage in Court.

 

[Opie]

This is super simple. If an Officer asks for consent and you don't want him to search say no. If he has probable cause he will likely do it anyway. I would hope that anyone on this board is not involved in criminal activity and has nothing to hide, so the search will hopefully amount to nothing. If contraband is found during the search the officer will have to articulate the consent, probable cause, or warrant when it goes to court.

I have NEVER seen a person or vehicle illegally searched. I have NEVER suspected an officer of not actually smelling weed when he said he smelled it. I wouldn't stand by and let a police officer conduct an illegal search.

I think the OP's question has been answered now by several people involved in law enforcement, lawyers, and forum members.

Probably time to put this one in the books and unsubscribe.

 

[cosermann]

Sad, sad commentary on society when it's considered "odd" for one not to have friends who smoke pot.

I don't have any either. Guess I'm odd . . . proudly odd.

 

[HoughMade]

Sad, sad commentary on society when it's considered "odd" for one not to have friends who smoke pot.

I don't have any either. Guess I'm odd . . . proudly odd.

None that I know of. If I do, they don't talk about it...or smell of it.

We do however hit the freebase so hard that Ricky Nelson's pilot wakes up in the middle of the night screaming. (do I really need to purple that?)

 

[TheSpark]

I'm sure it's been said- TLDR

Personally, I would not consent to a search...even though I have nothing to hide. I would make my lack of consent clear, but polite.

Unfortunately many people do consent because they "have nothing to hide." An example I like to use is say a year ago, maybe 5, you were on a prescription drug and one, unbeknown to you, dropped on the floor between the seats. Officer locates the pill and now all of a sudden you have a drug charge. Just one very plausible way a person with nothing to hide could find themselves in the slammer because they consented. You should never consent to a search for any reason.

IANAL but I believe the mere smell of drugs is not enough for a search. I think they have to have a "hit" by a dog to proceed.

 

[Tactically Fat]

We do however hit the freebase so hard that Ricky Nelson's pilot wakes up in the middle of the night screaming.

Freebase! That's my favorite Skynard song!!

 

[SEIndSAM]

Not to threadjack, but is really a big issue?? How often does this happen??
I drive 50-60K miles a year for work. I see the Police have someone pulled over and being searched maybe once a month...
The very few Cops I have known have said the same thing that VUPUBlue said earlier, they were too busy with real work to waste their time with fishing expeditions...

 

[Kutnupe14]

Sad, sad commentary on society when it's considered "odd" for one not to have friends who smoke pot.

I don't have any either. Guess I'm odd . . . proudly odd.

Is it? Besides the legality, why is it sad? The only way I'd say (imo) you could justify your condemnation, is if you also said the same about alcohol. And if you don't have friends that drink alcohol, I'm just going to assume you moved into the Unabomber's shack and haven't had contact with people for years.

 

[Drail]

I have to believe that there must have been a damn good reason that the Founding Fathers wrote the Bill Of Rights. Sadly, no one seems to able to remember what that reason was. I guess that now it's much more important that no one is allowed to interfere with the wants and desires of any police officer. What were the Founding Fathers thinking? How dare they restrict the police? In the United States we have the Bill of Rights AND the highest number of incarcerated citizens per capita of any nation on the planet. We used to be free. Now we are just meat for the grinder.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Unfortunately many people do consent because they "have nothing to hide." An example I like to use is say a year ago, maybe 5, you were on a prescription drug and one, unbeknown to you, dropped on the floor between the seats. Officer locates the pill and now all of a sudden you have a drug charge. Just one very plausible way a person with nothing to hide could find themselves in the slammer because they consented. You should never consent to a search for any reason.

IANAL but I believe the mere smell of drugs is not enough for a search. I think they have to have a "hit" by a dog to proceed.

Yep, YANAL.... or a LEO. A dog isn't needed.

 

[Kutnupe14]

I have to believe that there must have been a damn good reason that the Founding Fathers wrote the Bill Of Rights. Sadly, no one seems to able to remember what that reason was. I guess that now it's more important that no one interferes with the wants of a police officer. Can't have that.

I'm missing the issue? It's in your best interest to NOT interfere with a police officer. Why would you risk it?