Very messed up situation? MINNESOTA

[funky_monkey58]

OK so two of my friends and I went to my parents house for the night on the indian reservation. The trip up went good.Ht trip back had issues.
So we were driving along minding our own business smoking shisha out of my hookah. (tobacco and molasses blend) when we where almost back in town a friendly state trooper decides that since we are smoking a hookah it has to be marijuana. (and its a bong of course) which is against everything i do. so we pull over the goof comes to me on the passenger side of the car i rolled down the window and, "whatcha smoking?" i of course being a law abiding citizen told him flat out its shisha and this is a hookah. which is a tobacco blend theres nothing illegal in this. He then proceeded to inform me that it is somehow illegal.????Wtf??? since when is smoking tobacco in your car illegal? I told him it is not illegal and the hookah is protected under federal law as a non paraphenalia
item when its used in accordance with the law. (smoking tobacco) the officer then demanded for me to exit the vehicle and put my hands on the roof. Wtf so i did it of course i was then searched, and put in the back of the squad car. My friends were like What the? the officer being a nice guy called for back up and ordered my friends to get on the ground in front of the car. (all of this is happening on a fairly busy highway) so back up arrived and my friends were both put in different squad cars. there was a total of 5 squad cars for us rebel shisha smokers. well then the officer and upholder of the law decided it would be a great idea to search the vehicle. (under supposed probable cause, we had a hookah and were smoking traditional shisha tobacco with it.) never did the officer ask for permission to search the vehicle not did they read us our miranda rights. oh and even more messed up when i tried to call my lawyer with my cell the officer confiscated my cell???? Is that legal to refuse a person contact with their attorney during a non warranted search?well the search of the car concluded they found the katana the tomahawk and two toy guns under the seat. ok the katana is very sharp and dangerous. so a brilliant officer took it out of its case and started swinging it around. We all objected to that telling him thats its sharp and not to treat it
like a toy. ok no biggy they took the two airsoft desert eagles and acted like they found some real guns and put them on top of the car while people were staring driving by of course. looks really good to be arrested and have cops pull big hand guns from your car right. It didnt end there the laptop bag of my friends of course thats where we are hiding drugs right? Must ruffle trough that. as well they found my one friends insulin and needles then a officer went up to the squad car and asked me if anyone of us is a diabetic i said yes justin is why dont you leave that stuff alone its important. so the car was completely rummled through and the search for contraband was fruitless. so the officers confiscated the hookah and my tobacco for it as well as the airsoft guns. All of which is valued at about $375. so get this theres one citation written a gross misdemeder for uncased fire arms. (toys) with the confiscation of my hookah i got no paraphanalia citation or anything. so WTF? In my mind we were stopped on probable cause brought the officer into awareness that we arnt doing drugs. manged to get thrown in the squad cars
and then let go???? no citations were wrote for illegal substances and we were humiliated in public with our stuff ruffled through. not to say they left the most dangerous items in car the katana and the tomahawk.

Whats wrong with these cops what i had in my possesion was declared non paraphanalia in this clause U>S CODE TITLE 21 >CHAPTER 13 >SUBCHAPTER I >Part D >§863.f

 

[moburkes]

They did not have to read you your rights at that time. Stop listening to what you hear on TV.

 

[funky_monkey58]

i am aware of this now. however that is not the issue directly at question. The question is, is something probable cause just because an officer is too ignorant to look up said statue on paraphernalia? As well that no illegal activities were committed.

 

[Bretagne]

Exactly which statute are you charged with violating? Is it 609.666? That statute reads:

609.666. Negligent storage of firearms



Subdivision 1. Definitions. For purposes of this section, the following words have the meanings given.


(a) "Firearm" means a device designed to be used as a weapon, from which is expelled a projectile by the force of any explosion or force of combustion.


(b) "Child" means a person under the age of 18 years.


(c) "Loaded" means the firearm has ammunition in the chamber or magazine, if the magazine is in the firearm, unless the firearm is incapable of being fired by a child who is likely to gain access to the firearm.


Subd. 2. Access to firearms. A person is guilty of a gross misdemeanor who negligently stores or leaves a loaded firearm in a location where the person knows, or reasonably should know, that a child is likely to gain access, unless reasonable action is taken to secure the firearm against access by the child.


Subd. 3. Limitations. Subdivision 2 does not apply to a child's access to firearms that was obtained as a result of an unlawful entry.

You've got a pretty good argument on the search of the car. The officers went way past plain view, didn't have consent, and searched in containers like a fishing expedition.

If you're charged with the above statute, you should get an attorney to fight the search. An air rifle is a "firearm" under this statute. Were you older than 18 and the other passengers younger?

 

[funky_monkey58]

I was a passenger. nobody in the vehicle was a minor at the time this took place. I believe the
charge was code 978.045 may be mistaken the officer in question doesn't have very good penmanship.

 

[Happy Trails]

I was a passenger. nobody in the vehicle was a minor at the time this took place. I believe the
charge was code 978.045 may be mistaken the officer in question doesn't have very good penmanship.

You are confusing federal law with state law on the parphernalia. You most likely weren't charged with drug paraphernalia, because if tested it wouldn't result in an illegal substance and most likely would have been dismissed.

The code you are being charged with appears to be St. Cloud's local ordinance code. I can't access that specific code on line, since the site is only updated to 1977.

You can contact the City attorney's office at 320-255-7204, if you want specifics on that citation. They also are located in St. Cloud City Hall at 400 2nd Street South.

 

[funky_monkey58]

will do thanks so much.