pulled over

[missymit33]

Indiana. i was pulled over for expired plates, then asked if they could search my vehicle when i asked them why they said it was precedure? i was pulled over by a newburgh indiana cop in evansville indiana. they found some pills that were not my prescription but because i was terrified of going to jail (35 years old and never been to jail) i told them i had a prescr. they told me they would give me a week to bring them proof, the deadline is tonite. i did go to jail that nite for a writ, and bonded out. i have to call this cop and i dont know what to say or do, please give me adviceWhat is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? also forgot to say that they gave me 2 tickets and the adress that they pulled me over on the ticket is not the same as where they pulled me over! on the ticket it says newburgh and were i got pulled over is evansville

[justalayman]

another case of a person giving up their rights and it biting them in the ass.

You had all rights to tell them no, you cannot search my car. Unless they have probable cause, they had no legal right to search your car without your permission.


so, next time, just say no.


I would suggest finding an lawyer ASAP.

whoops, looks like you waited until the last minute to decide what to so. Not a good thing. The cop can charge you with possession of schedule drug without a prescription. Never a good thing. If you don't have a prescription, obviously you cannot provide one to the cop. So, you either tell him you don't have one or just not call him. In either case, there is the possibility of arrest.

If/when you are arrested, do not say anything. Hire an attorney or if you cannot afford one, wait until you are arraigned and ask for one.

I can't stress it enough; do not say anything. You are not going to be able to talk yourself out of the arrest but you surely can talk yourself into one as well as giving the cops all they need to convict you.

[missymit33]

i had never been in trouble in my life, and i was terrified! i didnt know what to do, but thank you so much for taking the time to reply! i appreciate it

[RoyLDenton]

I read about 2 sentences of your post and stopped. Why? Because YOU screwed up.

Police have no duty to tell you the truth. Ignorance has never been an excuse to violate the law and respectfully, you were ignorant.

IF you even remotely thought you had anything illegal, or not, you should always say NO to police. Procedure he says? Here is your procedure. First, make a duplicate copy of your car door key. Insert that key into your wallet. If ordered from your car by police, FINE. Just as you exit your vehicle "click" the locks and lock your doors. If he says WHY, say nothing.

Let him do whatever he wants to do. Everything his procedure may be, fine, who cares because you have a procedure to, its called "your constitutional right to keep your mouth shut.

Bottom line: Let them get a warrant to search your car. Your car is LOCKED. Let THEM do anything they want to do and take names. Once it all is over, save pennies and within one year, walk into a federal distrcit court and file suit against the police officer "INDIVIDUALLY", not the city, respondeat superior or such. Your object is not motivated by money, as a lawyers objective is. A lawyer has bills to pay plus student loans. Read, learn grow a set and file a civil action against police officer(s) INDIVIDUALLY. As long as your case is not held to be frivolous you will not ever have to pay attorney fees, even if you lose. In the end whatever money you had to pay, or whatever inconvienience you had you can multiply by 10 at least and in the end you have won, even if you lose.

[laurabb1960]

Thank you for stating this so clearly ... that you HAVE A RIGHT TO SAY NO to a search of your car when pulled over for a traffic violation.

I am a 50 year old mother of four children ... In our city/county, the police are notorious for pulling teens over for various reasons (nothing wrong with the reasons they are being pulled over ... license plate light out, didn't signal for a turn, etc.), and once they have them pulled over, they ask to search the car. Many of the daughter's friends (in the 16-17 age range) have gotten in trouble for things found during searches for which they've consented.

My daughter was pulled over recently for failure to use a turn signal (legitimate reason). The officer had her get out of the car and called for backup (two officers responded) and asked her to perform two field sobriety tests. After deciding she didn't "pass," he had her take a breathalyzer test. She registered 0.000. After doing that, he asked if he could search her car. Her reply was, "My mom said I should never let anyone search my car without a warrant." The officers [plural by now] scoffed and said they didn't need a warrant ... but they DID NOT search her car. After all that, they let her go about her way without a ticket or warning in relation to her not using her turn signal.

I was glad that she listened to me ... for once. :-)

[davidmcbeth3]

Thank you for stating this so clearly ... that you HAVE A RIGHT TO SAY NO to a search of your car when pulled over for a traffic violation.

I am a 50 year old mother of four children ... In our city/county, the police are notorious for pulling teens over for various reasons (nothing wrong with the reasons they are being pulled over ... license plate light out, didn't signal for a turn, etc.), and once they have them pulled over, they ask to search the car. Many of the daughter's friends (in the 16-17 age range) have gotten in trouble for things found during searches for which they've consented.

My daughter was pulled over recently for failure to use a turn signal (legitimate reason). The officer had her get out of the car and called for backup (two officers responded) and asked her to perform two field sobriety tests. After deciding she didn't "pass," he had her take a breathalyzer test. She registered 0.000. After doing that, he asked if he could search her car. Her reply was, "My mom said I should never let anyone search my car without a warrant." The officers [plural by now] scoffed and said they didn't need a warrant ... but they DID NOT search her car. After all that, they let her go about her way without a ticket or warning in relation to her not using her turn signal.

I was glad that she listened to me ... for once. :-)

I always ask them : are you gonna find more evidence of speeding in my glovebox?

[dmspi5]

When the police ask you to search your car, definately say no. It doesn't matter if you have something to hide or not. Also something I learned in criminal law was that the trunk isn't a part of the car when being searched.

[justalayman]

When the police ask you to search your car, definately say no. It doesn't matter if you have something to hide or not. Also something I learned in criminal law was that the trunk isn't a part of the car when being searched.

Not true. The trunk is not within the scope of the search for a Terry search but for a legal search either by consent, warrant, or PC, yes it is part of the car.

[BOR]

When the police ask you to search your car, definately say no. It doesn't matter if you have something to hide or not. Also something I learned in criminal law was that the trunk isn't a part of the car when being searched.

Depends on the state and why, of course. As an example, if we are talking about a search based on the smell of MJ, in Ohio the passenger compartment can be searched, but not the trunk.

Yes, this conflicts with other jurisdictions, but the OSC has set guidelines under our own Constitution.

[disneykid52]

yep,,,tell them "no" and hope its like 2am so the judge can get a call at that hour from a nice sound sleep to get the warrant requested

[Some Random Guy]

Bottom line: Let them get a warrant to search your car. Your car is LOCKED. Let THEM do anything they want to do and take names. Once it all is over, save pennies and within one year, walk into a federal distrcit court and file suit against the police officer "INDIVIDUALLY", not the city, respondeat superior or such. Your object is not motivated by money, as a lawyers objective is. A lawyer has bills to pay plus student loans. Read, learn grow a set and file a civil action against police officer(s) INDIVIDUALLY. As long as your case is not held to be frivolous you will not ever have to pay attorney fees, even if you lose. In the end whatever money you had to pay, or whatever inconvienience you had you can multiply by 10 at least and in the end you have won, even if you lose.

Police officers have limited immunity for actions perfomed as part of their duties. This is a significant hurdle to overcome for your case not to be dismissed.

A more effective and less time consuming approach would be to refuse to let them search your car, and then if they search anyway without legal justification, file a motion to have the results of that search thrown out.

[laurabb1960]

"A more effective and less time consuming approach would be to refuse to let them search your car, and then if they search anyway without legal justification, file a motion to have the results of that search thrown out."

But then it's your word against the officer's word. There's no way of proving you said "NO." That is what is so frustrating ... but in the instances I've discussed, the teens GAVE consent. In my daughter's case, the officer(s) said they didn't need one, but they didn't search. As an adult, I've NEVER been asked whether they could search my car.

[justalayman]

But then it's your word against the officer's word. There's no way of proving you said "NO." .

but at least you have a shot. Better than willingly giving up your rights and then having absolutely no chance of claiming an illegal search.

[BOR]

But then it's your word against the officer's word. There's no way of proving you said "NO." That is what is so frustrating ...

Well, a crooked cop is crooked cop.

There was a CA Highway Patrolman who murdered a motorist/young girl, while ON duty, he told to follow him to a secluded area for investigation.

[disneykid52]

"A more effective and less time consuming approach would be to refuse to let them search your car, and then if they search anyway without legal justification, file a motion to have the results of that search thrown out."

But then it's your word against the officer's word. There's no way of proving you said "NO." That is what is so frustrating ... but in the instances I've discussed, the teens GAVE consent. In my daughter's case, the officer(s) said they didn't need one, but they didn't search. As an adult, I've NEVER been asked whether they could search my car.

just hit the record button on your cell phone. im sure you as well as the court will hear you say "no"