car was searched without consent and i was arrested for cociane

[Zigner]

Everything I Stated Is True I Must Have Told The Police 5 Times Not To Search My Vehicle I Have Not Seen The Police Report Not Sure How To Get It I Have Never Been Arrested Before Im Just Trying To Find Out If This Is Going To Effect Me For The Rest Of My Life For A Stupid Mistake I Was Told I Had A Court Appt Attorney That I Have No Information On How To Contact And I Am Just Trying To Get Some Help On What To Do , Before I Go To Court And Have A Court Appt Attorney That Looks At My Case For 2 Seconds And Doesnt Tell Me Anything On What Is Going On.
If You Have Info That Can Give Me Better Knowledge Thanks If Not Then No Thanks

Well, THAT was difficult to read.
Look up (in the phone book or on the internet) the telephone number for the Public Defender at the courthouse you are dealing with. Then, call them.

 

[motley69]

thank you for replying i dont have a name for the public defender i was next to her for a couple minutes at the county jail court room but never had a chance to talk to her it was a bond hearing and i was released on my o.r. so maybe she will contact me.

 

[outonbail]

Where exactly did the officer find the drugs? Were they sitting on the front seat, floor or where they were visible to the officer?
If they were aware of you being at this store and next to this dealer, they could have been watching or had plain clothes detectives watching the transaction. Why do you think they didn't see any transaction?
Could the store employees have called the police to report the activity?

Your attorney needs to get a hold of the police report so you know what it is they're claiming to justify the search.

 

[Zigner]

thank you for replying i dont have a name for the public defender i was next to her for a couple minutes at the county jail court room but never had a chance to talk to her it was a bond hearing and i was released on my o.r. so maybe she will contact me.

Ok, let me rephrase. Call the PD's OFFICE and ask them...

 

[tbud333]

In California the police do not need your permission to search a vehicle, they only need a reason to pull you over, and they don't have to read you your rights when they arrest you.(People watch too much TV). I don't think you are going to get off on this. They pulled you over because they suspected you were involved in a drug deal. They did find the drugs in your car. You got caught, period. Take your punishment and learn from it.

 

[Zigner]

In California the police do not need your permission to search a vehicle...

Really?

 

[moburkes]

Really?

I was going to reply, but just left it alone.

I suppose he knows so MUCH about CA law...

 

[Zigner]

I was going to reply, but just left it alone.

I suppose he knows so MUCH about CA law...

You know...he may very well be right. I mean, heck, I've never given my permission for the police to search any vehicle in the state of California...yet it happens all the time

 

[CdwJava]

In California the police do not need your permission to search a vehicle,

Welllll .... We DO need consent unless the driver or other party is on probation or parole (justifying a limited search), the vehicle is going to be towed, the driver is arrested (also limited), or some other exigency exists.

they only need a reason to pull you over, and they don't have to read you your rights when they arrest you.(People watch too much TV).

Of course we need cause to pull someone over, and no we do no have read someone who is arrested their rights. However, if we want to interview them after they are in custody we DO have to read them their rights.


- Carl

 

[JustAPal00]

None of this matters anyway. The officer will probably go into court and say he saw a transaction no matter what. I mean after all he cought a drug user. Look the officer is probably a good guy trying to do the best job he can. He will feel justified for the search because he found something. He didn't frame anyone! It happens all the time, I had an officer lie in court when I was fighting a ticket!

 

[Mike Groaning]

I would think that not allowing a search after you've been seen talking to a drug dealer is probable cause. I've had my vehicle searched, and the cop pretty much said flat-out that I have the right to refuse, but that this is considered suspicious behavior.

A) You are refusing an opportunity to prove to you aren't in possession of drugs, or B) you are trying to avoid having your drugs found ------ Which seems more probable to you?

 

[CdwJava]

I would think that not allowing a search after you've been seen talking to a drug dealer is probable cause. I've had my vehicle searched, and the cop pretty much said flat-out that I have the right to refuse, but that this is considered suspicious behavior.

The law disagrees with you.

You have a lawful right to prove and this refusal can NOT be used against you for good cause to search. If an officer relies on this thinking, he's on a fast track to a suppression hearing, and very likely to sanctions from the court or his agency for his blatant disregard of the law. At best he needs to be retrained ... at worst, he needs to be prosecuted.

- Carl

 

[kdhohio]

I have never, nor would I ever consent to the search of my vehicle. I also have never had any drugs, illegal weapons, or stolen crap in my car. I refuse solely because I have a right to. People have died for our rights and I feel it is in vain if we not only don't know our rights or don't exercise them. If a police officer has probable cause they are going to search it no matter what you say so you might as well "just say no". OP that statement works well concerning the drugs they found in your car too....Kudos to that officer.

 

[Mike Groaning]

The law disagrees with you.

You have a lawful right to prove and this refusal can NOT be used against you for good cause to search. If an officer relies on this thinking, he's on a fast track to a suppression hearing, and very likely to sanctions from the court or his agency for his blatant disregard of the law. At best he needs to be retrained ... at worst, he needs to be prosecuted.

- Carl

It doesn't disagree with me. I've never searched anyone's car, nor have I stated whether what happened was right or wrong.

You might disagree with the cop, but that doesn't mean they're wrong. If our OP takes it to court and has the evidence thrown out, then the cop was wrong. The way you make it sound, it should be a pretty open and shut case of illegal search.

 

[CdwJava]

It doesn't disagree with me. I've never searched anyone's car, nor have I stated whether what happened was right or wrong.

Here is what you wrote:

"I would think that not allowing a search after you've been seen talking to a drug dealer is probable cause."

THAT is the statement you made which is out of step with the law. Being seen talking to someone with a history of dope use or even sales is NOT generally going to be sufficient to permit a search absent consent or some other lawful authority.

You might disagree with the cop, but that doesn't mean they're wrong. If our OP takes it to court and has the evidence thrown out, then the cop was wrong. The way you make it sound, it should be a pretty open and shut case of illegal search.

Unless the officer has something more than simply seeing the two together, yeah - it IS pretty open and shut, and a bad search. However, I suspect the officer is going to be able to articulate more than the fact the two were seen chatting.

If one of my officers based a non-consensual search on the simple verbal exchange between the two, I'd ream his tail for exposing himself and the department to civil liability and send him back for retraining on search and seizure issues.

- Carl