Probable cause?

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CA

I have questions about what is considered probable cause.

Every time I get pulled over for any reason, it shows that I've been arrested for possession of MJ previously. This makes the cops suspicious and they proceed to pull me out of the car and interrogate me. I can understand their suspicions, I just wish I didn't have to have my time wasted from mistakes that I've learned from.

Is the odor of MJ from a car combined with a prior arrest for MJ considered probable cause to search a car? I declined to a search last night several times to two officers who wanted to search my car so badly. They let me go because they couldn't smell an odor, but they informed me that if it does smell like anything to them, they can search my car despite my right to decline a search. Is this correct?

Also when I was told to step out of my car, I had already declined a search once and I knew they were about to play the game of sit me on the curb and try to get me to admit to something. So I took my keys out of the ignition and put them in my pocket and closed my door behind me like any informed person would. I know they can look inside my car without searching it, but I didn't want to make it easier by leaving the door open. I was yelled at for putting my keys in my pocket and closing my door, when I had done absolutely nothing wrong except have a prior arrest record. I was extremely courteous the whole time. Did I do anything out of line?

Also, I allowed them to search me personally after I was out of the car. Do I have the right to decline them to search my pockets? I wasn't sure if I did or not, usually they frisk you for their safety. And I didn't want to sound suspicious by allowing one kind of search but not another.

It's amusing to me how friendly the officers got after they got nothing out of me. They shook my hand and let me go. I wish I could just save those 10 minutes of my life and not be bothered for doing nothing wrong. Considering you can't even be arrested for possession of MJ anymore in CA.

Anyways thanks for any advice about probable cause and if I was wrong for putting my keys in my pocket. Cdwjava I especially appreciate your insight.

The odor is enough for probable cause.

Google "terry stop".

Cali408nia said:

Every time I get pulled over for any reason, it shows that I've been arrested for possession of MJ previously.

Click to expand...

I doubt that.

First of all, criminal offender records are not so readily available in the field by officers. Second, even LOCAL arrest and contact records are not regularly checked by officers in the field. You may want to believe that they know of your prior arrest, but unless they have some personal knowledge (even through the rumor mill) then it is unlikely they are obtaining it through their dispatcher or a vehicle computer system. In fact, accessing state criminal offender records on whimsy is generally prohibited.

Is the odor of MJ from a car combined with a prior arrest for MJ considered probable cause to search a car?

Click to expand...

The odor is often sufficient to establish probable cause. I propose that it is the odor of marijuana that provokes interest, and then, perhaps, you admission to a prior arrest when asked that gives them knowledge of said arrest.

Of course, since marijuana possession in CA was a non-custodial misdemeanor (now an infraction as of January 1st) you would have only been cited for it, and not booked ... unless for more serious marijuana offenses.

I declined to a search last night several times to two officers who wanted to search my car so badly. They let me go because they couldn't smell an odor, but they informed me that if it does smell like anything to them, they can search my car despite my right to decline a search. Is this correct?

Click to expand...

Yeppirs.

If you intend to smoke or transport dope, expect it come back on you one day. Understand that marijuana is quite pungent, and it's distinctive odor can linger for days on clothing and inside of vehicles. Even air fresheners cannot mask the distinctive odor (much as chewing spearmint gum when you leave a bar tends to provide minty Budweiser breath rather than masking the aroma). Pine-fresh marijuana odor is not uncommon.

Did I do anything out of line?

Click to expand...

Only if they had probable cause to search the car.

Also, I allowed them to search me personally after I was out of the car. Do I have the right to decline them to search my pockets?

Click to expand...

Yes.

They can conduct a pat-down for weapons based on very minimal articulated probable cause, but this generally does not involve diving in to pockets. if they do so without asking, or, without being able to articulate why they felt there was a weapon in that pocket, whatever they find might get suppressed.

Considering you can't even be arrested for possession of MJ anymore in CA.

Click to expand...

You couldn't have been arrested for it before, either Well, not booked, anyway, though the misdemeanor citation is, technically, an "arrest."

Anyways thanks for any advice about probable cause and if I was wrong for putting my keys in my pocket. Cdwjava I especially appreciate your insight.

Click to expand...

Got your back ...

Thanks, those responses helped me.

Ok, well here's what I've been told. I've been told by said officers that they have me on record in the system for possession of MJ before. The city I live in, the city I've been cited in, and the city I was pulled over last night are all the same. So it is a local issue. They've only told me this after I've already admitted to them that I've been arrested for possession of MJ.

So, if you propose that they likely don't know and can't get my records, what happens if I tell them I've been arrested for something else instead? I'd like to avoid the hassle of being assumed to have dope because I've had it before, but I also don't want to lie to an officer. I've been telling the truth and telling them that I have been arrested for possession of MJ before because I didn't want them to find out otherwise and then call me a liar.

The first time I encountered a cop after my conviction, I told her I hadn't been arrested, because as you say, it's a cite and release. And even though it's not a booked arrest, it's an "arrest" and I didn't know that. The officer told me I was lying to her and got snobby with me, when I honestly didn't know that was considered an arrest. So I think they have the resources to find out that I've been arrested, but maybe not what for.

Going further on your point about maybe smelling an odor first and spiking interest about prior arrests. Is it common for officers to ask somebody if they have been arrested before? I seem to get asked this question a lot. Do you think he smelled an odor and prompted that question? Or just a standard question that they often ask? His back up officer stated he smelled no odor later when they let me go.

Going further on my keys in pocket and closing the door. What if I had rolled up my drivers window, locked the door, and then put my keys in my pocket so that the officer couldn't stick his head in the car? I can tell he was frustrated that I knew my rights and was making it harder for him to see in my car, and I have a feeling he would've been really pissed if I rolled up my window and locked it up. I don't want to be accused of not obeying an officer but I also have the right to lock my car when I have provided license, registration, insurance, and haven't done anything wrong, do I not?

Lastly, I'm wondering if the situation of odor present would be any different for a medical patient. If I have a medical recommendation and there's an odor present in my car, what can an officer do? As I understand it, medical patients are allowed to transport a certain amount of MJ in a locked glove box or trunk of a car.

CdwJava said:

I doubt that.

First of all, criminal offender records are not so readily available in the field by officers. Second, even LOCAL arrest and contact records are not regularly checked by officers in the field. You may want to believe that they know of your prior arrest, but unless they have some personal knowledge (even through the rumor mill) then it is unlikely they are obtaining it through their dispatcher or a vehicle computer system. In fact, accessing state criminal offender records on whimsy is generally prohibited.

Click to expand...

Carl, Come on now if the police do not have access than they have an uncanny ability. I have never known police to not have immediate access.
They would certainly want to know if they pulled over a violent felon.
They certainly know a persons record and sometimes use that information in the way they treat that person.

Cali408nia said:

Ok, well here's what I've been told. I've been told by said officers that they have me on record in the system for possession of MJ before. The city I live in, the city I've been cited in, and the city I was pulled over last night are all the same. So it is a local issue. They've only told me this after I've already admitted to them that I've been arrested for possession of MJ.

Click to expand...

Then they did their homework. It was not like they made a traffic stop and found all of this out while they were there at the scene.

So, if you propose that they likely don't know and can't get my records, what happens if I tell them I've been arrested for something else instead?

Click to expand...

You can tell them that if you want, but if they do the research later on and find out you lied, they will remember you as a liar.

I'd like to avoid the hassle of being assumed to have dope because I've had it before, but I also don't want to lie to an officer.

Click to expand...

They cannot act solely on your past, only upon articulable probable cause in the present. Under the right fact set, that could include your past, but by itself your past will not give them P.C. to do much of anything.

So I think they have the resources to find out that I've been arrested, but maybe not what for.

Click to expand...

Of course they do, just not right there in the field. A local cite and arrest might be available if they go to a computer in the car, or they call their dispatcher, but only if the agency has a system that readily tracks these in dispatch. Many do, but some don't, and it is not a question commonly asked on a traffic stop.

If you are in a small to medium sized town, it is likely that at least some of the officers know you or your name - especially if you have been in trouble a few times. And sometimes we might accuse the person of a lie to see if they will open up about what we think is the truth.

Going further on your point about maybe smelling an odor first and spiking interest about prior arrests. Is it common for officers to ask somebody if they have been arrested before?

Click to expand...

It is not UN-common. If we think someone has a record, we usually ask as it might lead to an admission of being on probation or parole.

I seem to get asked this question a lot. Do you think he smelled an odor and prompted that question? Or just a standard question that they often ask?

Click to expand...

Could be either one.

His back up officer stated he smelled no odor later when they let me go.

Click to expand...

Bad sniffer, not close enough to smell it, who knows. I have a somewhat poor sense of smell so when I smell it, it can be rather overwhelming to most others.

Going further on my keys in pocket and closing the door. What if I had rolled up my drivers window, locked the door, and then put my keys in my pocket so that the officer couldn't stick his head in the car?

Click to expand...

After you got out at his direction, probably not a problem unless he had probable cause to search the car.

But, if I stop you and you immediately get out of the car and do all that, I'm very likely to order you back IN the car ... that way I will get to see and smell whatever it is you did not want me to.

Lastly, I'm wondering if the situation of odor present would be any different for a medical patient.

Click to expand...

Not necessarily. If you have the state-issued card, and identify where the marijuana is, you MIGHT get off without further problems.

Though the discovery of the marijuana might result in no charges ... provided you have the STATE issued DHS card and not just a recommendation from a doctor. The recommendation can still result in a citation, and if the marijuana appears to have been smoked or is capable of being smoked in the car that can be another problem ... as can driving under the influence of marijuana.

dave33 said:

Carl, Come on now if the police do not have access than they have an uncanny ability. I have never known police to not have immediate access.

Click to expand...

Then the police where you are have some super-duper computers that do no exist all the time.

The availability of that info and the transmission of it to an officer in the field are two different matters. When I pull a person over, if I have a real pro-active dispatcher I might get the return on the registration without asking. If I run the driver, I will get any warrants and the DMV status on the person, and a pro-active dispatcher MIGHT give me a head's up of there is a local record of interest - particularly if he is known to be violent to cops or carry weapons, be on probation or parole, etc.

What I will NOT get is any part of a state criminal history as that would be strictly verboten in CA.

A typical traffic stop does not obtain all that info, and many officers and agencies do not even check that info on a stop. The CHP is notorious for not checking records. And any officer that would tie up air time running a person through every possible local or available state database he could would soon be standing tall in the watch commander's office.

Yes, the info is available. No, it is NOT typically transmitted ot the officers in the field unless specifically requested.

They would certainly want to know if they pulled over a violent felon.

Click to expand...

You would think so, but, no. I could tell you stories ... and how do you think cops get killed? I know an officer with my old agency that was killed because that info was NOT readily available.

They certainly know a persons record and sometimes use that information in the way they treat that person.

Click to expand...

Yes, they can obtain much of that information later on (not all would be available in the field), and, yes, a person's history can haunt them. But, one's history is largely irrelevant as a sole factor in the establishment of probable cause.

Criminal information is available to the public within seconds. I am
sure the cruisers have that capability also.

When a traffic stop occurs, the p.d. runs the plates and the owner.
The officer is fully aware of the situation before approaching the vehicle.
This info. certainly has an effect on the officers actions.

I realize that past criminal history would not be sufficient for p.c.
That is why this metod is not made public or included in the report.

An officers actions are certainly dictated by criminal info.

You cannot reasonably say that someone with prior drug convictions has the same chance of being searched as pope John.


NO SUPER COMPUTER NEEDED

dave33 said:

Criminal information is available to the public within seconds. I am sure the cruisers have that capability also.

Click to expand...

In California state Criminal Offender Records are NOT readily available - by law. When we run them we have to list a lawful reason they are being run, and this does NOT include "traffic stop." Even "suspicion" does not cut it. A case or incident number to support the lawful reason for the information being sought is required, and if audited (which happens annually) a written explanation for a lawful justification is required. The information is then generally prohibited from being out out over an unsecure radio frequency.

I challenge you to find ANY public access to California CORI files. Unlike many other states, ours are strictly confidential and highly restricted.

As I said LOCAL records MAY be available upon request. But, even those agencies that have computers in their car, the officer is NOT (or SHOULD not be) sitting in his or her car with their nose into a computer screen while a subject is standing there. A dispatcher might get that local information (contacts made by the agency or, in some cases, anywhere in the county - provided records are up to date), but it is generally done on request or when you have a really pro-active dispatcher on a slow night.

When a traffic stop occurs, the p.d. runs the plates and the owner.

Click to expand...

In an ideal world ... but, in practice that just does not usually happen. In CA our registration does not come with an age or description - just the name and address (when registered last). Running the name of the owner could get dozens of hits (that do not pop up on a screen, just a number saying the number of near matches). Unless the officer can narrow it down with info on the driver or an age (perhaps the officer knows them), or the dispatcher looks in another database (besides the DMV database he or she is already in) then they might find some local contacts and make a good guess. No matter, it is not an instantaneous thing.

The officer is fully aware of the situation before approaching the vehicle.

Click to expand...

If only that were true. I've been at this for nearly 20 years and I can still probably count on one hand the number of times I have been "fully aware" of the history of a driver before approaching a vehicle because of info provided by dispatch. A good dispatcher might have some info if the name or the vehicle is flagged, and their computer system is good enough to instantly bring up the reason for the flagged info, but even that is generally little more than a notification and not a detailed history - and rarely completely communicated to an officer while approaching a car on a stop ... again, it goes back to air time. If I am "fully aware" it is because I know the individual by reputation or from prior contacts, not because the dispatcher found it all in the seconds leading up to my contact.

If that were the case, many officers that are killed each year might still be alive.

I realize that past criminal history would not be sufficient for p.c.
That is why this metod is not made public or included in the report.

Click to expand...

Probable cause must be articulated. They can't just write, "I had probable cause to search the car and I found the dope." The officer must spell out what the P.C. was.

An officers actions are certainly dictated by criminal info.

Click to expand...

To some extent, sure. If I am contacting a known parolee with a history of assaults on officers, I am going to approach that person far differently than an 80 year old woman. But, if I know a person has been arrested for drug cultivation, that does not give me any P.C. to search the car. It might encourage me to take a long sniff, ask a few questions, and see if I can get consent to search, but it is not P.C. to do anything by itself.

You cannot reasonably say that someone with prior drug convictions has the same chance of being searched as pope John.

Click to expand...

Never said that. But, a prior history is not probable cause.

And, knowing that prior history is not likely prior to contact absent personal knowledge. I only wish we had such instant access to the numerous different databases that might have the info you speak of, but we don't, and it is not instant and takes time to request and communicate in the field.

If they ask you to step out of your car, lock the door as you leave it & close the door (and roll up the windows fully). Do not open the window further than 1-5 mm to allow your DL to be given.

Don't answer any questions other than to identify yourself. Say I'll answer any questions in court, later.

Its not an opportunity to chat with the police; its an opportunity for them to collect evidence to arrest you.

Hope you discontinued drug use ... it leads only to trouble.

Never grant permission to search .. they can take your seats out of the vehicle if they wish & leave them on the side of the road.


And I would hope that police treat felons different than non-felons, really...

dave33 said:

You cannot reasonably say that someone with prior drug convictions has the same chance of being searched as pope John.

Click to expand...

The pope could not be searched ... diplomatic immunity ...

In all my years I have had only one person lock his car when he got out. His bad, however, because he locked his KEYS in the car. He thought he was being all tricky, but he was only being asked out to be shown that his tail light was out ... it cost him about $75 for his smarts.

Oh, and just enough to pass an ID through is sufficient to smell alcohol and marijuana. And the odor is not the only thing we look for in impairment cases - just one of a number of things. If impaired even slightly, opening the window a few millimeters is probably NOT a good idea ... it's hard to thread that little card through the slot. Watched a guy do that a few times and drop his license on the inside of his car a couple times. Then he proceeded to hand me some other kind of ID - a library card, or membership card, or something. He provided some great P.C.

Some people just manage to outsmart themselves. But, they are free to try if they wish.

CdwJava said:

In California state Criminal Offender Records are NOT readily available - by law. When we run them we have to list a lawful reason they are being run, and this does NOT include "traffic stop." Even "suspicion" does not cut it. A case or incident number to support the lawful reason for the information being sought is required, and if audited (which happens annually) a written explanation for a lawful justification is required. The information is then generally prohibited from being out out over an unsecure radio frequency.

My mistake about public criminal records in Cali. The point I was making is that officers can get that info. I believe they still have access. You say "traffic stop" and "suspicion" are not good enough. That may be true but I am sure that you have figured out a way. There is no doubt if the officers know what words will not work, they also know what words will work.




I challenge you to find ANY public access to California CORI files. Unlike many other states, ours are strictly confidential and highly restricted.

Public..o.k. Not to the police.

As I said LOCAL records MAY be available upon request. But, even those agencies that have computers in their car, the officer is NOT (or SHOULD not be) sitting in his or her car with their nose into a computer screen while a subject is standing there. A dispatcher might get that local information (contacts made by the agency or, in some cases, anywhere in the county - provided records are up to date), but it is generally done on request or when you have a really pro-active dispatcher on a slow night.

Available upon request...Moving along.


In an ideal world ... but, in practice that just does not usually happen. In CA our registration does not come with an age or description - just the name and address (when registered last). Running the name of the owner could get dozens of hits (that do not pop up on a screen, just a number saying the number of near matches). Unless the officer can narrow it down with info on the driver or an age (perhaps the officer knows them), or the dispatcher looks in another database (besides the DMV database he or she is already in) then they might find some local contacts and make a good guess. No matter, it is not an instantaneous thing.

The plate number. That should usually provide a good match with little guesswork. Carl, how could you forget about the plate number?



If only that were true. I've been at this for nearly 20 years and I can still probably count on one hand the number of times I have been "fully aware" of the history of a driver before approaching a vehicle because of info provided by dispatch. A good dispatcher might have some info if the name or the vehicle is flagged, and their computer system is good enough to instantly bring up the reason for the flagged info, but even that is generally little more than a notification and not a detailed history - and rarely completely communicated to an officer while approaching a car on a stop ... again, it goes back to air time. If I am "fully aware" it is because I know the individual by reputation or from prior contacts, not because the dispatcher found it all in the seconds leading up to my contact.

Splitting a few hairs. Maybe not "fully aware". Mothers maiden name, likes, dislikes etc.. How about general criminal info.


If that were the case, many officers that are killed each year might still be alive.

I am not in any way making light of an officer being killed. But, we know that an officer is about their own safety 1st and foremost. If there was a pattern of officers getting killed for a specific reason I have to believe some policies would be getting changed. How many officers in how many stops?



Probable cause must be articulated. They can't just write, "I had probable cause to search the car and I found the dope." The officer must spell out what the P.C. was.

Exactly. P.c. is extremely easy to articulate. Although the example above may not work, there are many more that do.



To some extent, sure. If I am contacting a known parolee with a history of assaults on officers, I am going to approach that person far differently than an 80 year old woman. But, if I know a person has been arrested for drug cultivation, that does not give me any P.C. to search the car. It might encourage me to take a long sniff, ask a few questions, and see if I can get consent to search, but it is not P.C. to do anything by itself.

Again..exactly. The criminal history is the initiating factor. Anything that happens after that is the result of the persons criminal history.


Never said that. But, a prior history is not probable cause.

Right. That is why officers say they did not know the history. Admitting to a check could raise doubt about the search. It could be said the officer used the past for p.c. thus giving the accused a reasonable shot at suppression. We all know that officers account of the incident all but excludes any "wrong" act on the officers part.

And, knowing that prior history is not likely prior to contact absent personal knowledge. I only wish we had such instant access to the numerous different databases that might have the info you speak of, but we don't, and it is not instant and takes time to request and communicate in the field.

Click to expand...

Sorry about how I screwed up the way this is done but I think you get the point.

dave33 said:

My mistake about public criminal records in Cali. The point I was making is that officers can get that info. I believe they still have access. You say "traffic stop" and "suspicion" are not good enough. That may be true but I am sure that you have figured out a way. There is no doubt if the officers know what words will not work, they also know what words will work.

Click to expand...

I am the NCIC/CLETS instructor for two agencies, and I am here to tell you that you cannot just casually pull that up in CA.

When the state checks our records they ask for a copy of the face sheet of a crime report or some other written documentation supporting the running of that CORI file. There are VERY FEW lawful reasons to run that information, and an agency that has too many "memos" trying to explain crap away will lose their access. Our state DOJ is very protective.

No, there is no way for the officers to easily get state records in the field. As I said, they can often access local records on request or by checking their computer system (provided they are one of the handful of counties WITH county-wide systems AND MDTs). But, this information is rarely if ever imparted to an officer prior to approaching the vehicle. It just does not happen that way.

Public..o.k. Not to the police.

Click to expand...

We can't either. Hell, I'm the guy that does all of this, and even *I* can't get the information without a case number and the subject being run as a suspect, or one of the very few other reasons. We can't even run prospective employees that way! About the only non-criminal applications are for ridealongs and for visitations at the jail.

The plate number. That should usually provide a good match with little guesswork. Carl, how could you forget about the plate number?

Click to expand...

Clearly, you are not familiar with our registration system in CA. If I run your CA plate, I get the name and address of the registered and legal owners. I do NOT get a description, an age, or a birthdate. If the owner is John Smith, I would have to run a reverse registration on "John Smith" ... then, when I get a notice saying there are 345 hits, I'd have to start trying to narrow it down by age bands and city to try and get a possible for the registered owner. That cannot generally be done in the time the officer has between putting out the stop and reaching the driver's side window.

As I said, if the dispatcher KNOWS the vehicle or driver because of prior contacts or a flag in their system, he can usually impart what is known as "officer safety" alerts or warnings to the officer, but this rarely includes past local convictions, only things that might effect the officer's physical safety AND that have been entered into the alert system.

Splitting a few hairs. Maybe not "fully aware". Mothers maiden name, likes, dislikes etc.. How about general criminal info.

Click to expand...

Nope. Never ... unless that knowledge was imparted prior.

I am not in any way making light of an officer being killed. But, we know that an officer is about their own safety 1st and foremost. If there was a pattern of officers getting killed for a specific reason I have to believe some policies would be getting changed. How many officers in how many stops?

Click to expand...

There is physically no way that the public would put up with a detention lasting as long as might be necessary for an officer to wait at his car and await transmission of every records check in the world. Not to mention the obvious safety problems that would arise!

Checking the most common databases can, in large agencies, already take several minutes in large or busy agencies - 10-15 minutes is not uncommon. Checking for a local contact and criminal history might even require access to a separate network.

Not every record pops up when you run a name, and not every one is accessible through the same database. And sometimes the systems are slow or down. I personally know an officer who was killed by a violent felon who was in the country illegally for the umpteenth time after being previously convicted of violent felonies then deported. This information would have been unknown unless a very specific records system was checked, and that system is rarely ever checked on field contacts unless a warrant has been issued.

Again..exactly. The criminal history is the initiating factor. Anything that happens after that is the result of the persons criminal history.

Click to expand...

The known history might be a factor in the officer's course of action, but it cannot be the determining factor. And, the officer almost certainly does not know that history unless he has prior knowledge, spends time on the phone calling dispatch or records fishing for that info while the person is detained, or the info is volunteered by the suspect.

Right. That is why officers say they did not know the history.

Click to expand...

Why? I use it all the time. It is a factor in establishing probable cause. If I smell the odor of marijuana, and I know the person also has a prior history for sales or distribution of marijuana, that only strengthens my PC. I'm all for mentioning it because it benefits me. What I cannot do is say that I knew he had a history and that's why I searched him. Nope, that wouldn't cut it. I had better have something more than that or it is a bad search, big time.

Here's some truths ... the average traffic stop takes between 15 and 30 seconds from the time the officer STARTS on the radio until the time the officer begins his approach or even reaches the driver. In that amount of time, the dispatcher MIGHT have had sufficient time to enter the license plate of the vehicle into CLETS. The return the dispatcher should get back within seconds (if the system is not bogged down) will include the registration of the vehicle and any "hits" on the vehicle as being wanted in a crime, stolen, under observation by some agency, etc. Usually the officer is at the driver's window when he is getting the vehicle info back.

When the officer runs the driver, the name or DL number is run through DMV for license status and information (which might include past convictions entered by the DMV for driving offenses - which might include marijuana possession in the vehicle). If run through CLETS at the same time, warrants and supervised release records will pop up in (hopefully) several seconds - these are wants and parole records, and some county probation records. Then, in sophisticated systems or with really good dispatchers with some time on their hands, they might also check local history for local officer safety notifications and alerts, past history that might put the officer at risk, or other info of note ... this might come out while the officer is preparing the citation.

If, for some reason, the officer finds out that the driver has a past history for dope or other crimes before he is done with his citation, he might ask some more questions of the driver. That's what we are paid to do - be suspicious. And one of the best indicators of future acts is past behavior, so, they investigate. But, it is rare that we do get that level of info while in the field on a typical traffic stop. If only we could be instantly imbued with all this history of the person it would be great - but we're not. Unlike TV, the data that they tend to have on one screen often comes from numerous databases that must be accessed separately. Some computer systems are set up to submit those requests separately, but many are not. In the counties I have worked for, they tend to have to search a minimum of two systems to find a significant level of info and it could take several minutes. Then, IF there is time, and the officer is requesting it, they can impart the abbreviated version to the officer in the field. But, unless it is asked and necessary, most agencies will not tie up the radio with that kind of info ... not to mention that many radio repeaters are set to disconnect after 45 seconds or a minute of constant transmission (though this varies).

TV is great, but it rarely reflects reality. And in reality, we rarely are capable of getting all the information we would like to have.

Just wanted to add a few bits, good discussion.

davidmcbeth3 said:

If they ask you to step out of your car, lock the door as you leave it & close the door (and roll up the windows fully). Do not open the window further than 1-5 mm to allow your DL to be given.

Click to expand...

I agree with locking doors and only rolling them down a little bit. But when the officer yells at you or suspects you of trying to stash something in your car but making a move to roll your window up and put your keys in your pocket, it's rather intimidating. It's happened before. I should have the right to protect my car but I shouldn't have to be intimidated and threatened.


Regarding info in the computer system...
After my first possession charge, I was pulled over for window tint in a city I didn't live in or had ever been pulled over in. As I mentioned earlier, I told her I hadn't been arrested before. She went back to her car to run my D/L and start writing me a fix it ticket for window tint and no insurance (I did have insurance but I didn't have proof, my fault). She came back to me a few minutes later and told me I lied to her. This was 2 years ago, but I believe she asked me "what did you do last September" and that was indeed the month I was first cited and I had never had a prior history before. I'm not 100% positive on that but I do remember something like that. My experiences seem to indicate to me that they have some way of knowing. There was no "homework" done by this officer. I had never encountered this police department or been pulled over in that city. Either they had the info or the officer was guessing at what she said and was completely right on. But I do also have to believe what you're saying, Cdw, you have a lot of experience.

Now, my 2nd citation was in a car and it did go to the DMV, I have a point on my driving record for it right now. So there's the answer to all the times that I've been pulled over subsequent to that incident. When they run my D/L it will show up. When the point expires from my DMV record, will there be any trace of that in the DMV info that officers get when they run a D/L?