no warrant search on private property?

What is the name of your state? Georgia, Lowndes County

Vehicle was in a private property parking lot, Wal-Mart. The store is open 24 hours a day. Two people in the car. Car pulls up, they get out, they go in the store, purchase items and spend about 10 minutes in the store. They walk out, get in car and get on cell phone calling Roadside Assistance provided by cell phone provider, since the car had a flat tire. While on the phone, cop pulls into parking lot, pulls up to car. Asks 2 people to step out of car, questions about tire, and cop was told that roadside assstance was called and the people showed the purchase receipt (some candy and drinks) to the cop. At this point, does the cop have probable cause to ask for a search of the vehicle?

The cop then calls for a 2nd cop. When 2nd shows up, he asks to search the vehicle, and response was "i have nothing to hide." he then searches the vehicle. Probable cause?

[Son of Slam]

Originally posted by jbrianp
What is the name of your state? Georgia, Lowndes County

Vehicle was in a private property parking lot, Wal-Mart. The store is open 24 hours a day. Two people in the car. Car pulls up, they get out, they go in the store, purchase items and spend about 10 minutes in the store. They walk out, get in car and get on cell phone calling Roadside Assistance provided by cell phone provider, since the car had a flat tire. While on the phone, cop pulls into parking lot, pulls up to car. Asks 2 people to step out of car, questions about tire, and cop was told that roadside assstance was called and the people showed the purchase receipt (some candy and drinks) to the cop. At this point, does the cop have probable cause to ask for a search of the vehicle?

The cop then calls for a 2nd cop. When 2nd shows up, he asks to search the vehicle, and response was "i have nothing to hide." he then searches the vehicle. Probable cause?

"The store is open 24 hours a day."
***This statement leads me to believe you were there at an odd hour. "Munchin' down" on candy and soda + at Wal-Mart, + with a flat tire. = You were in possession of marijuana.

hmm.. guess i forgot to ask this question as well.

Can someone pretend to properly interprit the scenario and tell me what I was charged with even though some, and most, information was withheld?

But, I will play. No, it wasn't me. No, it was not some obscene hour, it was 11:30pm. No, there was no marijuana in the car, and no, nobody was charged with possession.

Thank you for your keen advice though. I do appreciate it.

[TYRIS]

Originally posted by jbrianp
What is the name of your state? Georgia, Lowndes County

The cop then calls for a 2nd cop. When 2nd shows up, he asks to search the vehicle, and response was "i have nothing to hide." he then searches the vehicle. Probable cause?

-from your post, it sounds like the officers were given consent to search. if so, probable cause doesn't apply.

Tyris

I can understand that on a traffic stop or something. But, on a private lot, with a bunch of people and cars, what would give them cause to even question the 2, to pull into the lot, etc. Wouldn't the lot owner have to report a disturbance?

[harbor14]

Just based on the information provided. I would call this a social contact. An officer may approach anyone at anyplace and speak with them. This does not require any probable cause or reasonalbe suspicion. If consent to search was asked for (does not require pc or rs) and was given there is no need for a warrant. Private property does not matter.

They could have said no and there would be no search.

[JETX]

ACTUALLY:
The question was: "At this point, does the cop have probable cause to ask for a search of the vehicle?"
Answer:
No. The officer doesn't need a probable cause to ASK to search the vehicle. He would however, need a probable cause or permission to actually do a search.

"response was "i have nothing to hide." he then searches the vehicle."
*** Actually, that would probably not happen in this situation. Clearly the officer was not under threat of harm. In fact, it sounds like this was all done very civilly. In that case, the officer would very likely ask the person to sign a 'Consent to Search' form and not just rely on a vague statement like "I have nothing to hide".
So, the question becomes, was written consent received or did the subject answer more affirmatively before the search???
Also, what was found??

no written statements. the person firmly states his response was "i have nothing to hide". Allegedly the cops found suspected narcotics in the vehicle.

[stephenk]

" Allegedly the cops found suspected narcotics in the vehicle."

What does that mean? The cop either found drugs or he didnt.

[Son of Slam]

Originally posted by knotcops
They could have said no and there would be no search.

Sure

[Son of Slam]

Originally posted by jbrianp
Allegedly the cops found suspected narcotics in the vehicle.

That puts me close enough for the 10 points.

Being on private property does make a huge difference on wheather a cop engaging in conversation with you in your vehicle. See, when you're in a public parking lot, where you put yourself in the open for anybody to engage in conversation with you, they have that right just as you have the right too not engage back. But when you're on private property in your vehicle, you have more of an expectation of privacy because not anybody can approach you to engage in conversation because you're on PRIVATE property, not public. The same thing applies to pigs, when you're in public, you put yourself in a position to be approached by a pig who has every right to and is not unnormal for, to engage in conversation with you as opposed to you being in private, a pig can't infringe on your private affairs without due process of law unless they have a warrant or pc. But in the end, they can and will do whatever they want so watch out, because nobody is safe anywhere. The only thing I would argue in court if I was you, was lack of probable cause reguardless of giving consent or not. You had a legitimate expectation of privacy and the police did not suspect a crime was going on unless sitting in your car is now a crime, which last I thought wasn't. You should be able to get the narcotics thrown out because they weren't out in the open to be seen, and without them, there would be no case because no other crime was committed

[JETX]

"But when you're on private property in your vehicle, you have more of an expectation of privacy because not anybody can approach you to engage in conversation because you're on PRIVATE property, not public."
*** Hey, idiot!! Hate to tell you... but there is NO 'expectation of privacy' when sitting in a Wal-Mart parking lot!! So, your entire post is inane... just as your obviously drug-induced 'reality' is.

I can see why you 'believe' you are hassled by the police. You are probably so stupid that you light up in front of them.

[harbor14]

Originally posted by Mr. Friendly
But when you're on private property in your vehicle, you have more of an expectation of privacy because not anybody can approach you to engage in conversation because you're on PRIVATE property, not public. The same thing applies to pigs, when you're in public, you put yourself in a position to be approached by a pig who has every right to and is not unnormal for, to engage in conversation with you as opposed to you being in private, a pig can't infringe on your private affairs without due process of law unless they have a warrant or pc.

Not wanting to burst your bubble but expectation of privacy does not even come into play on this. An officer can approach anyone, anytime, almost anywhere and speak with them. It is called a social contact; no pc, no warrant, no reasonable suspcion is needed. It has nothing to do with private property! The rules are the same for a social contact. You are free not to talk with the officer and go about your business. However if you give consent to a search it is valid. Suggest you bone up on constitutional law before giving such silly advice.