Probable Cause?

StagnantReaction

StagnantReaction

Bluelighter
Joined
Mar 19, 2004
Messages
4,489
Situation: Speeding in a car, carrying paraphenalia & less than 2.3g cannabis under the seat. Police officer pulls over car for speeding.

Police officer sees driver looking in the glove compartment. Driver fails to produce proof of insurance. Police officer asks if driver is hiding anything illegal in car, driver denies.

Police officer searches car on grounds of supposedly seeing driver hide or put away something in the glove compartment. Nothing is found in the glove compartment. The illicit substance and paraphenalia is found under the seat.

Charges: Speeding, lack of insurance, possession of cannabis- less than 2.5g, possession of paraphenalia

Is this probable cause for a search? What are the chances of this case getting thrown out on these grounds, given that the situation is their word vs. his?
 
StagnantReaction said:
Is this probable cause for a search? What are the chances of this case getting thrown out on these grounds, given that the situation is their word vs. his?
Click to expand...
When you say his "word vs. [the cops]", are you implying that your friend is going to deny that he reached for the glove compartment? If he is not going to deny reaching for the glove, then it isn't a matter of whose word is more credible. The main issue, whether law enforcement had grounds for a search, is the important one. If your friend is serious about getting the search tossed, then he should get an attorney. As for his chances of success -- I'm not sure. Many times it will depend on how willing your friend and the prosecutor are to fight this out.

will write more later...
 
He will not deny that he reached for the glove compartment. He did, in plain sight, but merely to search for required papers. It is now a question of the cop's discretion for the search, as to why he thought he should get probable cause. Since when is it illegal to "move hands" inside your own vehicle, especially when anticipating that you will need to produce a document?

Furthermore, is it necessary for police officers to read you your miranda rights when arresting you? This was not done. Also, my friend was told "You don't look like a Mercedes (his car) driver". My friend is of Philipino descent, and has a moderately dark skin tone. Also, the officer, when questioning my friend at the station, was waving the evidence in front of him. Are these standard procedures for uniformed police officers?

To recap, this was moderate speeding, leading to a search upon grounds of "seeing hands" move inside the vehicle.
 
What state are you in?

There are a few interesting glove compartment cases when it comes to warrantless searches. A lunge or other furtive gesture is usually insufficient, by itself, to render search reasonable. Going for the glove compartment has been held as probable cause when the defendant had a history of weapons possession. Commonwealth v Concepcion, 411 NE2d 477 (Mass. 1980). And again, there is a California case where it was held that a patrol officer had probable cause to believe that other areas of defendant's vehicle may have contained contraband where money that defendant furtively attempted to stuff into glove compartment was in officer's plain view when defendant attempted to conceal it and where object clearly recognizable as guncase was also in plain view on floor of vehicle. United States v Finnegan (1977, CA9 Cal) 568 F2d 637. [45 A.L.R.3d 581].

The furitive behavior (reaching for the glove) usually must be combined with something else to equal probable cause. If the officer had knowledge of prior offenses, if he smelled marijuana in the car, or if the car fit the description of a suspect vehicle, then this would be an additional factor that might push the circumstances to probable cause. In your case, it does not seem like there is an additional factor.

I'll look up how lack of proof of insurance fits into this...but it definitely sounds like a lawyer could help -- especially what you said about your friend not looking right for the car.
 
Last edited:
pc

Having no ins. Will lead to arrest and then search incident to arrest. If car impounded then inventory search and thus a legal search, sorry!
 
^
What about states where there is no mandatory proof-of-insurance law?
 
Illinois. Mandatory insurance here.

I do not believe that the insurance was stated as the probable cause. It created a violation (ticket), however I believe the reason for performing a search was cited as "suspicious activity" inside the car, with reference to the glove compartment.

My friend is 17, has no prior offenses, and is of dark complexion, and was arrested on a sunday in a very white, upper-crust, small suburb. He was speeding in a Mercedes; an officer commented that he does not "look like the typical Mercedes driver".

The officer could not have smelled marijuana, as it was in a sealed container and uncombusted. Both the pipe and cannabis were in the backseat, out of reach and sight.
 
http://newsmine.org/archive/security/civil-rights/louisiana-police-search-without-warrants.txt

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment04/03.html

i'll rephrase.

in the US, police officers need probable cause to search your car. however probable cause could be that you looked like you were under the influence of marijuana because you had red eyes (very vague being that different people would consider eyes red at different levels of redness) or you seemed to be overly nervous.

In "some" cases, officers have been known to lie about the probable cause. its up to the officer whether or not they search your car legally.
 
^^Yea, i love the "why do you look so nervous kid?" line.

When youre sitting there, completely calm and composed, not nervous in any way, chill, relaxed, smooth, whatever.

You just KNOW they gonna use that against you if they find something. "Well sir, s/he looked nervous, agitated, and upset and was acting suspiciously so i found it as probable cause to search the vehicle." Yea, if breathing is suspicious.

2up.gif
PO PO!
 
thankyou, not everyone has been there.

i made a post earlier however that potentiated a false idea and i apologize.

i know personally some officers that are the most respectable people i've had the pleasure of meeting.

everyones different though.
 
1) The probable cause was not stated as looking under the influence. He did not look it at all, because he was not. He had not smoked that day.

2) Nervousness doesn't mean shit! 8)


So basically it's about the officer's word vs. my friend's? What about the sketchy police procedures? They did not impound the car, they did not read my friend his rights, they interrogated him, they made an almost racist and definately stereotypical remark.. etc Does the court look upon these things when deciding if they'll throw evidence out?
 
Law enforcement need only give a Miranda warning to an individual if they intend to subject him to an interrogation at the police station or when detained, otherwise such evidence gathered from an interrogation may not be used in court. Roadside questioning of a motorist detained pursuant to routine a traffic stop does not constitute a "custodial interrogation" for purposes of the Miranda rule, so that prearrest statements a motorist makes during such questioning are admissible. Berkemer v. McCarty, 468 U.S. 420 (1984).

Since the facts indicate that it is the roadside questioning that your friend's charges are built on, Miranda is probably not relevant here. (Or is there some other evidence they obtained from questioning him at the station that I'm missing?) The speeding, lack of insurance, and cannabis possession were all things that were discovered roadside, not at the station.

I think the racial remark could point to another motive for the officer deciding to search the car. A good attorney will be able to use this information to cast doubt on the officer's "probable cause." If the search is found to be improper, then all of the evidence obtained from the search must be tossed.
 
Last edited:
Thank you very much for your time and efforts. I really appreciate it. This information will hopefully lead the attorney in the right direction (the lack of was what I was afraid of from day 1).. you know sloppy lawyers that urge you to plead guilty and mercy, etc without fighting for illegitimate cases.

Will update with any further information gathered.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top