Did the cop do wrong?

[Spooney]

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

I'm helping a friend of mine with this.

He was driving the speed limit, all legit and everything. Tags in order, etc.. At about 1am, he was pulled over and given a field sobriety test, but he hadn't been drinking. The cop was rough, he said, trying to get him on drunk driving. But he never drives if he's been drinking that day. Maybe some cops think young men with a bunch of tats, piercings, and plugs, are a bunch of drunk driving idiots or something. Well, he's not one of those.

She checked the car over, checked registration, it all turned out fine. She focused on his license.

He had a suspended license prior to that, but it was reinstated. He had all the paperwork from the DMV verifying that. But the cop decided to write him up on suspended license anyway. The only citation on the ticket is a 12500.

She had a rookie cop with her. Speculation usually mean nothing, but he thinks she might have been trying to impress the rookie. (We live in an area where the cops really don't have much to do due to such a low crime rate.)

So he was pulled over without cause, driving within the speed limit, all lights in order, tags current, insured, and licensed. Yet he was ticketed for being unlicensed.

What recourse does he have here? Surely cops must have a valid reason to pull someone over, and a valid reason to ticket someone. Surely cops can't get away with abusing their authority like this?

 

[dmcc10880]

Although inconvenient, your "friend" should first call the DMV and ensure he has a valid license- confirming what they have in their system.

Then, go to court if necessary after step 1, plead not guilty and show the paperwork to the judge showing that he has a valid license.

Recourse? None.

FWIW? Your friend blew it on the stop. No probable cause, no reason to do a field sobriety test- regardless if he hasn't been drinking. That's a sticky situation though as it would likely have ended in an arrest, but field sobriety tests can be failed by even the most sober driver. No probable cause, no consent to a search of his vehicle- in other words, don't consent to a search.

You must live in Newport Beach? LOL

 

[Zigner]

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

I'm helping a friend of mine with this.

He was driving the speed limit, all legit and everything. Tags in order, etc.. At about 1am, he was pulled over and given a field sobriety test, but he hadn't been drinking. The cop was rough, he said, trying to get him on drunk driving. But he never drives if he's been drinking that day. Maybe some cops think young men with a bunch of tats, piercings, and plugs, are a bunch of drunk driving idiots or something. Well, he's not one of those.

She checked the car over, checked registration, it all turned out fine. She focused on his license.

He had a suspended license prior to that, but it was reinstated. He had all the paperwork from the DMV verifying that. But the cop decided to write him up on suspended license anyway. The only citation on the ticket is a 12500.

She had a rookie cop with her. Speculation usually mean nothing, but he thinks she might have been trying to impress the rookie. (We live in an area where the cops really don't have much to do due to such a low crime rate.)

So he was pulled over without cause, driving within the speed limit, all lights in order, tags current, insured, and licensed. Yet he was ticketed for being unlicensed.

What recourse does he have here? Surely cops must have a valid reason to pull someone over, and a valid reason to ticket someone. Surely cops can't get away with abusing their authority like this?

Paperwork from the DMV means very little if it hasn't shown up in the computer yet...

 

[CdwJava]

He was driving the speed limit, all legit and everything. Tags in order, etc.. At about 1am, he was pulled over and given a field sobriety test, but he hadn't been drinking.

Clearly your friend was doing something wrong. Or, are you alleging that the officer just randomly picked a car and pulled it over for no stated reason?

The cop was rough, he said, trying to get him on drunk driving. But he never drives if he's been drinking that day. Maybe some cops think young men with a bunch of tats, piercings, and plugs, are a bunch of drunk driving idiots or something. Well, he's not one of those.

Had he been using drugs? Prescription meds?

She checked the car over, checked registration, it all turned out fine. She focused on his license.

He had a suspended license prior to that, but it was reinstated. He had all the paperwork from the DMV verifying that. But the cop decided to write him up on suspended license anyway. The only citation on the ticket is a 12500.

Apparently the DMV record she ran indicated that it was suspended (likely with no good service) or expired. All he should have to do is submit proof of the valid license to the court.

So he was pulled over without cause, driving within the speed limit, all lights in order, tags current, insured, and licensed. Yet he was ticketed for being unlicensed.

I seriously doubt the officer just randomly and illegally stopped your friend without cause. Your friend is certainly free to hire an attorney to challenge the stop ... though, the cost of that attorney will be about 100 times more than the cost of a correctable violation, but that's his option.

What recourse does he have here? Surely cops must have a valid reason to pull someone over, and a valid reason to ticket someone. Surely cops can't get away with abusing their authority like this?

They can't. But, all because your friend does not know - or is not telling you - the reason for the stop, does not mean there was not one. Officers are not required to tell a person why they were pulled over. They would likely have to articulate it in court, but they do not have to tell the driver in the field.

I suspect there is more to this than you know or are telling.

 

[Spooney]

Cdw, an ex-boyfriend of my mom's was a cop in another state, and he told me a game he and one of his buddies had early in their careers. They'd point out a car and the other would pull over the driver and find some reason, any at all, to give a ticket, as a way to prove who knew the law the most, and sometimes one of the other would write a ticket that wasn't entirely valid just to not lose the "game." So yes, I do believe that cops will sometime pull people over for no reason.

Before I posted this, yesterday I told him to call the DMV. His license is valid. It was valid, in the system, before he was pulled over. He got a ticket for doing nothing wrong. You're saying the cop can ticket soemone for driving unlicensed when the DMV verified the license is valid? I don't buy that.

It makes no sense that an officer wouldn't have to tell someone why they were pulled over. That kind of bullsh1t is why I have absolutely no respect for the police. How can someone prepare a defense if the first they might, and only might, find out the charge is when they're in court? That's unAmerican and I'm sure unConstitutional.

 

[Spooney]

Dmcc, no, neither he nor I live in Newport Beach. I'm not even sure where that is. What's with that town? Is being pulled over without cause common there, and then falsely ticketed?

 

[Spooney]

Reading around this site some more, I get the feeling a lot of the advice-givers are under the false belief that the coos never do wrong and the system is flawless, and that anyone claiming to be falsely charge must be lying. Well, when the cops shoot one of your kids or something and you say your kid did nothing wrong, I'll tell you to just suck it up, your kid was lying to you and got what he deserved.

 

[Silverplum]

Okey-dokey. So pick up your refund at the door.

Reading around this site some more, I get the feeling a lot of the advice-givers are under the false belief that the coos never do wrong and the system is flawless, and that anyone claiming to be falsely charge must be lying. Well, when the cops shoot one of your kids or something and you say your kid did nothing wrong, I'll tell you to just suck it up, your kid was lying to you and got what he deserved.

Who said anything about police shooting someone's child?

Oh, just you.

 

[CdwJava]

Cdw, an ex-boyfriend of my mom's was a cop in another state, and he told me a game he and one of his buddies had early in their careers. They'd point out a car and the other would pull over the driver and find some reason, any at all, to give a ticket, as a way to prove who knew the law the most, and sometimes one of the other would write a ticket that wasn't entirely valid just to not lose the "game." So yes, I do believe that cops will sometime pull people over for no reason.

Maybe they do that in the state of the ex boyfriend of your mom's, but I have been at this game for 20 years in CA and have never known of anyone to so blatantly and intentionally violate state and federal law. It defied credulity to risk a career and freedom just to TRY and get a traffic ticket. There are plenty of legitimate violators out there, why risk federal prison for an infraction that may not even exist?

There are almost certainly the occasional yay-hoo out there that does something so stupid, but all because there is someone somewhere that has done so does not mean that such a thing occurred here. If he takes the citation to trial he can certainly cross examine the officer and ask why he was detained. If she is so stupid as to admit that she was just bored and pulled him over on a whim, then she deserves to go to prison.

Before I posted this, yesterday I told him to call the DMV. His license is valid. It was valid, in the system, before he was pulled over. He got a ticket for doing nothing wrong. You're saying the cop can ticket soemone for driving unlicensed when the DMV verified the license is valid? I don't buy that.

You'll have to ask the officer why she cited her for CVC 12500(a). The only thing that makes sense is that the dispatcher advised her that the license was suspended with no good service of the suspension, or that the officer was advised that there was no match.

Did you friend have her license in her possession?

In any event, if your friend chooses to take the matter to trial he can ask her this question as well.

It makes no sense that an officer wouldn't have to tell someone why they were pulled over.

Talk to your state legislator.

From a safety standpoint, not telling someone why they were stopped prevents distracting arguments from taking place on the roadside. From a courtesy standpoint, I'd agree that it would be nice. But, since officers have been killed when distracted by drivers arguing about the reason for the stop, it is not something that officers are typically trained to discuss until the conclusion of the stop or after they have already received all the information hey need form the driver.

That kind of bullsh1t is why I have absolutely no respect for the police.

Sorry to hear that.

But, your ire is directed in the wrong direction. The police follow the laws set up by your elected representatives. If you would prefer there be a law requiring a driver be told the reasonable suspicion for a detention, speak to your legislator. As of right now, no such law exists in CA.

How can someone prepare a defense if the first they might, and only might, find out the charge is when they're in court? That's unAmerican and I'm sure unConstitutional.

Your friend can pay for a deposition if he so chooses.

He can also seek the officer's notes through discovery. The officer may very well have the reason for the stop in her notes.

As for it being un-Constitutional, afraid not.

 

[Philxxxx]

Police must have a reason for pulling your over or to examine you in the first place. All other information gathered after an unlawful stop would not be admissible in court.

Since all you have to do is show that you had a valid license to win then I would file a pre-trial motion to exclude evidence that you had no valid drivers license....make the cop acknowledge that he did indeed violate your rights .. your right to travel, freely assemble, etc.

He'll probably just make up something .. swerving etc...but get this to the courts attention. The next time a defendant makes the same motion in front of the same judge concerning the same cop the judge will remember that this particular cop has done this before.

Judges are not stupid .. they'll give officers the benefit of a doubt for only so long.

And if you do win your motion then you can seriously consider a civil complaint against the officer &/or the town.

 

[dmcc10880]

Fact remains, if your friend has the documentation to prove his/her innocence or the validity of the license, there's no problem.

There is no recourse against the police.

 

[Philxxxx]

Fact remains, if your friend has the documentation to prove his/her innocence or the validity of the license, there's no problem.

There is no recourse against the police.

But if he no right to stop them then if they win a motion to exclude evidence past that point then they don't have to present an affirmative defense at all...

 

[CdwJava]

CVC 12500(a) is generally a correctable violation. If the OP's friend shows proof to the court that he has a valid license, the matter will be disposed of for a $25 administrative fee to the court.

In the alternative, the OP's friend can go to court and cross examine the officer as to the reasonable suspicion for the detention and what gave rise to her belief that he (the OP's friend) was unlicensed. If the officer is an idiot she'll shrug and say she violated the civil rights of the driver. If the officer had good cause, both will be articulated. If the officer did indeed violate the OP's rights and is vermin excrement, then she would be better off never showing up in court and allowing the OP's friend to win by default.

The ball is in the driver's court. He can take the matter to trial to try and find answers ... or not. He can also file a personnel complaint with the agency. At least that way he will be notified whether the matter was sustained or not (but not generally concerning the specific punishment - if any).

 

[Maestro64]

I know we have both types of people on this forum who live in their glass house world of the police never do wrong or the police are all corrupt. Let get past this and realize people are not perfect and there are many people running around with their own agendas and none of you know what the officer objectives were when they stopped someone on the road.

With that said, let assume the Op's friend in fact had a valid license and was given a ticket for driving on a suspended license. As many of you pointed out, go to court and present their case which is all well and good, but why should the person have to waste their time and money on something which is not valid in the first place.

As dmcc10880 has point out there is little recourse anyone has against the officer who wrote an illegal ticket. Police are legally protected from citizens bring a case against them for doing their job even if they were wrong when the did their job. Unless the person is willing to go the course CdwJava suggest which the op's friend will have to prove their civil rights were violated which is not an easy tasks.

The officer could simply say the database/computer said the license was suspended and wrote the ticket base on that in formation even if the information was wrong. The supreme court recently upheld that the police can not be held responsible for actions they take based on faulty information contained in government databases.

So any interaction a person has with the Police whether the person is 100% in the right or wrong will cost them lots of time and money and there is very little anyone can do about unless they are willing to spend lots more time and money to bringing a federal civil rights case against the officer.

For those who say it does not cost money if you win, that is not true since some states are charging people court fees even if they win the ticket. Plus unlike many police who get paid or get paid over time to show up in court to justify a bad ticket, lots of people have to take time off work.