illegal search & motion to surpress evidence

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? california
I lost a motion to surpress evidence hearing because the public defender offered no points or authorites at the hearing and the district attorney did. Is there anyway to appeal this ruling and how I would go about it. I can't really afford a private attorney but I'm positive the search was illegal as it was a traffic stop, I was not on any kind of parole/probation,and there was no probable cause (all facts admitted to by police officer at the hearing). While i did consent to the search of my vehicle, I did not consent to having my purse (which officer made me leave inside vehicle) being searched. The officer admitted that while he asked me if it was my purse, he never asked for permission to search it. In his ruling the Judge said that the public defender's argument was right and that when he takes off his robe and as a civilian it scares the heck out of him that the police would be conducting traffic stops in this manner he had to base his ruling on the supreme court rulings offered into evidence

whtgrl64 said:

I lost a motion to surpress evidence hearing because the public defender offered no points or authorites at the hearing and the district attorney did. Is there anyway to appeal this ruling and how I would go about it.

Click to expand...

Perhaps there was no relevant "points or authorities" to be made in support of your claim?

You cannot appeal simply because you lost. You might be able to request a Marsden Hearing threough the court and seek alternate counsel. You might then be permitted to raise the motion again ... not sure.

While i did consent to the search of my vehicle, I did not consent to having my purse (which officer made me leave inside vehicle) being searched.

Click to expand...

Oops! That's why you lost ... you gave your consent. Yes, you could have limited your consent to only the open areas, but apparently you did not. The officer is under no legal obligation to ask if he can look in this or that, or under the seats. If he asked to search the car and you said, yes, you pretty much gave him the green light to look everywhere in the car until you revoked your consent.

The officer admitted that while he asked me if it was my purse, he never asked for permission to search it.

Click to expand...

He doesn't necessarily have to.

In his ruling the Judge said that the public defender's argument was right and that when he takes off his robe and as a civilian it scares the heck out of him that the police would be conducting traffic stops in this manner he had to base his ruling on the supreme court rulings offered into evidence

Click to expand...

In other words, the judge said that while he does not agree with the status of the law, the search was legal. There are numerous cases to support a search of the vehicle, and the only cases I can find that would prohibit or limit such a search would have been if the driver was male and HE had given consent, not you.

I doubt that you will prevail even if you do get alternative counsel. But, you can try.

- Carl

I agree with Carl. Unless you actively removed your consent to search, the search was good. There are no points or authority in opposition which I have ever read.

revoked consent

actually, i tried to revoke consent, when the officer asked if it was my purse I said yes, when he started to open it I said "hey, I didn't ...." at which point second officer who was standing next to me told me to calm down and be quiet". Win or lose, this was b.s. I was coming home from work, same route and time i have been using for 2 years. The officer had no right to even ask me to exit the vehicle as i had already provided him with valid lic. reg. and he had already checked primary vin # on dash. at that point he should have run all info through his dispatch, issued me a fix it ticket for cracked windshield and let me go. Having me exit the vehicle under the pretense of checking secondary vin #'s was a clear violation of my rights and if you can't find any case ruling that say so might i suggest you didn't look very hard. Hey that's cool, it's about protecting your own not justice right

whtgrl64 said:

actually, i tried to revoke consent, when the officer asked if it was my purse I said yes, when he started to open it I said "hey, I didn't ...." at which point second officer who was standing next to me told me to calm down and be quiet". Win or lose, this was b.s. I was coming home from work, same route and time i have been using for 2 years. The officer had no right to even ask me to exit the vehicle as i had already provided him with valid lic. reg. and he had already checked primary vin # on dash. at that point he should have run all info through his dispatch, issued me a fix it ticket for cracked windshield and let me go. Having me exit the vehicle under the pretense of checking secondary vin #'s was a clear violation of my rights and if you can't find any case ruling that say so might i suggest you didn't look very hard. Hey that's cool, it's about protecting your own not justice right

Click to expand...

Carl is just about the most unbiased person on this forum. To insult him as you did is way out of line. The officer CAN ask you to step out of the vehicle. You are, apparently, just another CRIMINAL who is upset that they were caught.

whtgrl64 said:

if you can't find any case ruling that say so might i suggest you didn't look very hard.

Click to expand...

Oh really? Then YOU look and tell us what you found. Have a nice day!

whtgrl64 said:

actually, i tried to revoke consent, when the officer asked if it was my purse I said yes, when he started to open it I said "hey, I didn't ...." at which point second officer who was standing next to me told me to calm down and be quiet".

Click to expand...

Then your attorney should have brought that up at the motion hearing. As I said, if you feel counsel was incompetent, seek a Marsden hearing, see if the court will replace him, and then see if the court will allow you a second bite at the suppression apple. I doubt you will prevail on all of those accounts, but you can try.

The officer had no right to even ask me to exit the vehicle as i had already provided him with valid lic. reg. and he had already checked primary vin # on dash. at that point he should have run all info through his dispatch, issued me a fix it ticket for cracked windshield and let me go.

Click to expand...

He is permitted a certain amount of leeway in how he conducts his stop. He preferred to have you exit the vehicle. Unless specifically forbidden by your state's laws, or for some purpose not related to his duties, he was within his right to request you exit the vehicle.

Having me exit the vehicle under the pretense of checking secondary vin #'s was a clear violation of my rights and if you can't find any case ruling that say so might i suggest you didn't look very hard.

Click to expand...

First, you did not mention anything about his searching for a secondary VIN. Second, you asked about case law regarding the search of a purse inside of a vehicle.

However, yes, the officer CAN seek to match the VIN. The two places in the vehicle interior where the VIN would be located would be in the doorframe and on the driver's side of the dash. If he could not see one, he may well have been justified to search for it. If searching for a VIN is prohibited by your state law or court rulings, then if you get a new attorney and a new hearing, the new attorney can address it.

Hey that's cool, it's about protecting your own not justice right

Click to expand...

Hardly.

The easiest way to avoid getting caught with your dope is not to be transporting it.

- Carl

actually, i tried to revoke consent,

Click to expand...

Pity you didn't. From your description, you didn't as an objectively reasonable person would not take, "hey, I didn't ...." to mean you can search my car but not my purse.

The officer had no right to even ask me to exit the vehicle as i had already provided him with valid lic. reg. and he had already checked primary vin # on dash. at that point he should have run all info through his dispatch, issued me a fix it ticket for cracked windshield and let me go.

Click to expand...

You are right, except for the fact you CONSENTED TO SEARCH. He must have some reason to ask and you consented. End of story.

Having me exit the vehicle under the pretense of checking secondary vin #'s was a clear violation of my rights and if you can't find any case ruling that say so might i suggest you didn't look very hard.

Click to expand...

I didn't look for this at all. Do you have any other facts you'd like to add which you haven't related so far? (By the way, one person's "pretense" is another's reasonable suspicion.)

He is permitted a certain amount of leeway in how he conducts his stop. He preferred to have you exit the vehicle. Unless specifically forbidden by your state's laws, or for some purpose not related to his duties, he was within his right to request you exit the vehicle.

Click to expand...

Perfectly said. Since the Supreme Court said it is not a constitutional violation to arrest and take a person to jail for any violation of the law, including a seat belt not being fastened, there is not a federal violation to asking the person to get out of the car. State may be different.

The easiest way to avoid getting caught with your dope is not to be transporting it.

Click to expand...

Dope? Carl, you're so cynical. I'm sure the OP was just....hmm...well perhaps she didn't even know it was there, she was holding it for a friend, it said it was just 18!