Handcuffed and searched for a moving violation

[Melinda]

What is the name of your state? Missouri
Is it standard procedure to pull someone over for a moving violation and have the driver exit the vehicle be asked to turn around so that he can be searched and placed in handcuffs? No arrest was made, only a ticket issued for the violation.

 

[Litigation!]

What is the name of your state? Missouri
Is it standard procedure to pull someone over for a moving violation and have the driver exit the vehicle be asked to turn around so that he can be searched and placed in handcuffs? No arrest was made, only a ticket issued for the violation.

My response:

Yes, if you're being a smartmouth - - or, if you fit the description of someone the police wish to locate.

IAAL

 

[sukharev]

.. To answer your question, there is no such thing as a universal SOP for traffic stops. Every PD has its own version. If you need to know, request it via Freedom of Information Act request. You will get it within ~40 days, so be sure to ask for continuance from the court if needed.

 

[Just Blue]

To answer your question, there is no such thing as a universal SOP for traffic stops. Every PD has its own version. If you need to know, request it via Freedom of Information Act request. You will get it within ~40 days, so be sure to ask for continuance from the court if needed.[/QUOTE]


You know...He was right...

 

[seniorjudge]

What is the name of your state? Missouri
Is it standard procedure to pull someone over for a moving violation and have the driver exit the vehicle be asked to turn around so that he can be searched and placed in handcuffs? No arrest was made, only a ticket issued for the violation.

Yes, if you're being a smartmouth - - or, if you fit the description of someone the police wish to locate.

 

[HomeGuru]

Yes, if you're being a smartmouth - - or, if you fit the description of someone the police wish to locate.

**A: what about a dumbmouthed pain?

 

[sukharev]

OP has not given much detail, so leave your prejidice alone for the moment and look at this: http://www.kcpd.org/masterindex/files/lb/LB 05-05.pdf

In the Barks case, the court held that under the Fourth Amendment, law enforcement officers who make a routine stop based on a violation of state traffic laws may detain a person only for as long as necessary to conduct a reasonable investigation of the traffic violation. That investigation may include asking for the driver’s license and vehicle registration, asking the driver to sit in the patrol car, and asking the driver about his or her destination and purpose. Absent reasonable suspicion that Barks was involved in criminal activity based on specific and articulable facts, the patrol officer did not have authority to detain Barks after giving him his speeding ticket.

On top of that, any search without PC has to be concentual. Nobody should be handcuffed for fitting the description of someone else. DL has enough proof of identity on it, so unless OP had no license he should not have been detained and searched.

 

[Zigner]

OP has not given much detail, so leave your prejidice alone for the moment and look at this: http://www.kcpd.org/masterindex/files/lb/LB 05-05.pdf


On top of that, any search without PC has to be concentual. Nobody should be handcuffed for fitting the description of someone else. DL has enough proof of identity on it, so unless OP had no license he should not have been detained and searched.

Handcuffing is a form of detention - I don't see any problem (legally) with what happened. He was released as soon as the "investigation" was complete.

 

[poohmantbb]

On top of that, any search without PC has to be concentual. Nobody should be handcuffed for fitting the description of someone else. DL has enough proof of identity on it, so unless OP had no license he should not have been detained and searched.

You are right, the OP is being very vague. But even with the slightest inkling, a person can be put into cuffs. To answer the OP's question, handcuffing someone on a "routine" traffic stop is not normal, so maybe this wasn't a routine traffic stop... i.e "being a smart mouth *******"!!!!

SUK, practice what you preach about not assuming what happened. Read your quoted post.... your assuming the OP did nothing to provoke the braceets. Even if he had a license, the handcuffs have every right to come out. Ever heard of fake id's??? Dopers got numerous ones.

 

[seniorjudge]

Handcuffing is a form of detention - I don't see any problem (legally) with what happened. He was released as soon as the "investigation" was complete.

It was a she; but I agree.

Officer safety....

 

[Zigner]

It was a she

My apologies

 

[seniorjudge]

My apologies

As the Pope of Trig, I am urging you to go and sine no more.

 

[Leviticus]

As the Pope of Trig, I am urging you to go and sine no more.

No need to apologise Zigner.

Don't get so pompous Senior.
You were wrong again. It was a *he*.
Please read the original post more carefully!

 

[seniorjudge]

No need to apologise Zigner.

Don't get so pompous Senior.
You were wrong again. It was a *he*.
Please read the original post more carefully!

Melinda in Missouri is a HE!?

Mirabile dictu!

 

[Leviticus]

Melinda in Missouri is a HE!?

Melinda the OP is most likely a 'she'.

But she was describing an incident involving *another driver*, a 'he'.
"...and have the driver exit the vehicle be asked to turn around so that he can be searched and placed in handcuffs?"

Zigner caught this.
"... He was released as soon as the "investigation" was complete."

I caught it.

Can you see it now?