Possession of marijuana / paraphernalia (MO)

[milt0nbradley]

taken off...

 

[jsdm]

If you told the officer about the MJ before he Perry frisked you, you have very little recourse against the search - you justified it for him. Did he explicitly tell you before you mentioned the marijuana that he was going to search you? You may have a slim chance of a case against the search in that situation, but most likely the officer's notes will omit that part.

As far as not being Mirandized, I recall that the requirement for it was overthrown in the courts several years ago. Mind you, I'm not a lawyer so I don't know what the specific circumstances to that case were, and there may very well be some state statute where you live that requires it. If you didn't give them any extra evidence, then there is no legal ramification to your interrogation and subsequent incarceration. You're normally not given bail (and, subsequently allowed to make a phone call) until you're arraigned.

 

[The Occultist]

I normally wouldn't add to a thread in which the OP left, but your post, jsdm, has some inaccuracies that I figured I should correct in case to try to give advice to anybody else.

Firstly, it's not a Perry frisk, it's a Terry frisk (Google Terry v. Ohio for more info).

Secondly, you are quite mistaken about Miranda rights. Miranda is still in affect everywhere. Here is how it works: Miranda rights only need to be read AFTER an arrest and PRIOR to interrogation. If you have not been arrested, then Miranda doesn't apply. If you have been arrested and you are questioned before your rights have been read to you, then all that means is that any statements you make can be suppressed in court. This would mean that if under arrest, you could confess to a crime, and at trial your confession could not be used against you since your rights were not read. Miranda does NOT magically absolve one of the crime they committed. (Google Miranda v. Arizona for more info)