search of locked box found in my car

What is the name of your state? Washington
I was pulled over arrested on old traffic warrants police officers impounded my jeep. They found a locked box in my car said they were taking the box, my cds to the station in fear of someone robbing them while car was in the impound.came in the next morning said they obtained a warrant to search the locked box and decided to charge me with possesion of drugs and confiscated my jeep. I dont understand why the stuff that was in my vehicle went to the station and did not stay in my car. what reasons did they have to take anything out of my car when i was arrested on old traffic warrants to begin with. help in desperate need of some advice thank you

I guessing here, but maybe they took your personal possessions out of your jeep so they wouldn't be stolen while it was in the impound lot.

Like they TOLD you they were doing.

[HomeGuru]

Originally posted by sshady_girl
What is the name of your state? Washington
I was pulled over arrested on old traffic warrants police officers impounded my jeep. They found a locked box in my car said they were taking the box, my cds to the station in fear of someone robbing them while car was in the impound.came in the next morning said they obtained a warrant to search the locked box and decided to charge me with possesion of drugs and confiscated my jeep. I dont understand why the stuff that was in my vehicle went to the station and did not stay in my car. what reasons did they have to take anything out of my car when i was arrested on old traffic warrants to begin with. help in desperate need of some advice thank you

**A: you have got to be kidding. What kind of drugs were in the box?

[Son of Slam]

Shady is, as Shady dose, or was that, stupid is as stupid dose?

[HomeGuru]

Originally posted by Son of Slam
Shady is, as Shady dose, or was that, stupid is as stupid dose?

**A: are you trying to say does?

[Son of Slam]

Originally posted by HomeGuru
**A: are you trying to say does?

Yes. I guess Alzheimer's Disease just kind of creeps up on you.

You are going to need a lawyer.

That said, the cops can search your vehicle once the vehicle is legally impounded. Anything they find is booty as long as it seems to be (or contain) valuables. As far as your "lockbox," you may have an issue. I don't know about Washinton law, but unless the officers had probable cause to believe that contraband was in that box, that search was illegal. Again, get a lawyer in your state, as I can only speculate on this issue being an attorney from another state.

Good luck

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

What is the name of your state?

Originally Posted by NorthDA

You are going to need a lawyer.

That said, the cops can search your vehicle once the vehicle is legally impounded. Anything they find is booty as long as it seems to be (or contain) valuables. As far as your "lockbox," you may have an issue. I don't know about Washinton law, but unless the officers had probable cause to believe that contraband was in that box, that search was illegal. Again, get a lawyer in your state, as I can only speculate on this issue being an attorney from another state.

Good luck

My response:

So, your legal background tells you, NorthDA, that "State law" controls search and seizure; i.e., when you said, "I don't know about Washington law"? Please tell me, when it comes to "search and seizure", what does Washington law, as opposed to your State law, have anything to do with it?

You "can only speculate on this issue being an attorney from another state"?
Gee, do you "think" this issue might be a federal constitutional issue; i.e., 4th Amendment? Gee, I don't know. You tell me. (he said with sarcasm)

Your response, quoted above, is really making me wonder about your legal background.

IAAL

[url]www.cjtc.state.wa.us/led/May_2003_SS.pdf[/url]

Where a vehicle is impounded locked containers should be inventoried as a sealed unit absent exigent circumstances. See generally, State v. Houser, 95 Wn.2d 143, 622 P.2d 1218 (1980)

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

What is the name of your state?

Originally Posted by coosi

[url]www.cjtc.state.wa.us/led/May_2003_SS.pdf[/url]

Where a vehicle is impounded locked containers should be inventoried as a sealed unit absent exigent circumstances. See generally, State v. Houser, 95 Wn.2d 143, 622 P.2d 1218 (1980)

My response:

Please, Coosi. Did you even read that case?

The court in Houser merely discusses and explains a particular search situation for an issue that the U.S. Supreme Court had previously decided years earlier. Look at the U.S. Supreme Court cases cited therein.

Every state has it's own Appellate court decisions, like the "Houser" case, which merely further "explain" that which the Federal constitution spells out, and the U.S. Supreme court has already previously decided.

I liken what NorthDA said to "Miranda vs. Arizona" - - i.e., that giving a person their "rights" under Miranda differs from State to State when, in fact, it doesn't. Yet, each State has it's own case law that discusses Miranda. Discussing Miranda in a particular court case, doesn't make it "State sensitive", or different, or changes it, from one State to the next. It's the same thing with 4th Amendment "search and seizure"; i.e., the 4th Amendment is no different in Washington State as it is in Michigan, and is therefore not "State sensitive".

"Houser" was merely "explanatory" of previous U.S. Supreme court decisions.

IAAL

From page 1 of 176 of the link I posted...(*** are mine)

SEARCH, SEIZURE AND ARREST
A GUIDE FOR POLICE OFFICERS AND PROSECUTORS
MAY 2003
Pamela B. Loginsky, Staff Attorney, Washington Association of Prosecuting Attorneys

1I. INTRODUCTION
Law enforcement officers are sworn to uphold the Constitution of the United States and theConstitution of the State of Washington. The federal constitution protects the right of people from unreasonable searches and seizures.

FOURTH AMENDMENT-U.S. CONSTITUTION

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers,and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

***The federal constitution and the cases interpreting the Fourth Amendment establish the“floor” or minimum amount of protection that the federal government and every state government must extend to individuals.

***States, however, are free to provide individuals located within their borders with greater protection from search and seizure than that guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment.

***Washington’s constitution provides far greater protection from search and seizure than thatguaranteed by the Fourth Amendment. The Washington constitution protects an individual’s privacy.

[harbor14]

Originally Posted by coosi

From page 1 of 176 of the link I posted...(*** are mine)

SEARCH, SEIZURE AND ARREST
A GUIDE FOR POLICE OFFICERS AND PROSECUTORS
MAY 2003
Pamela B. Loginsky, Staff Attorney, Washington Association of Prosecuting Attorneys

1I. INTRODUCTION
Law enforcement officers are sworn to uphold the Constitution of the United States and theConstitution of the State of Washington. The federal constitution protects the right of people from unreasonable searches and seizures.

FOURTH AMENDMENT-U.S. CONSTITUTION

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers,and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

***The federal constitution and the cases interpreting the Fourth Amendment establish the“floor” or minimum amount of protection that the federal government and every state government must extend to individuals.

***States, however, are free to provide individuals located within their borders with greater protection from search and seizure than that guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment.

***Washington’s constitution provides far greater protection from search and seizure than thatguaranteed by the Fourth Amendment. The Washington constitution protects an individual’s privacy.

You are correct, Article I section 7 of the Washington state constitution provides greater protection than does the 4th Amendment standard. We have 'pre-textual' stop bans, warning to refuse consent to search at a residence. Both which are allowed under the 4th Amendment per the USSC.

This however has nothing to do with the above. Property from a vehicle was taken to the police station for safekeeping (community caretaking function of police) and WARRANT was obtained to search the locked box (warrant being issued upon affidavit of probable cause). Community caretaking function is an excecption to the warrant requirement to seize property. The warrant....well the warrant says it all.

I dont see any problems with this.

The warrant....well the warrant says it all.

We'll probably never know if there was probable cause.