Hmmm, I wonder if it was just local agency slang or something. Funny.
Could be law enforcement vs. lawyer or a regional thing. I’m sure my crim pro professor mentioned the case when he talked about automobile searches.
In fact, IIRC fifteen years later, we didn’t even read Carroll. We read *Ross * ( United States v. Ross - Wikipedia ), which talks about Carroll. *Carroll * was probably a note case (one that is briefly described in a note following an excerpted case).
Wow. We STARTED with Carroll. I remember to this day a discussion that included Carroll and Chimel and distinguishing issues between the two cases on the fly.
Ok, now if y’all are gonna start talking about law school, especially Crim Pro, I’m gonna start having nightmares. All I remember is my professor describing Schmerber in VERY graphic terms… jabbing needles, struggling suspect, etc. Yikes.
thanks a lot guys… 
And please God, let’s not get started on the Rule Against Perpetuities… :eek:
Sort of the reverse of the OP:
Several years ago (Late 80’s) coming back from NJ I was pulled over by a NJ state trooper for driving with DC plates. No joke. He actually told me that most DC people on “his” highway were drug dealers. He found a folding pocket knife in my pocket when he searched me for his protection and claimed it was illegal. He then told me “I will put this knife in your trunk if you let me search it and let you go with just a warning.” I knew all I had in the trunk was garbage and did not know if the knife was really illegal so I gave consent. He kept his word and let me go. Weather or not I would have had any kind of case had he not kept his word I do not know. I suspect not.
I also suspect there was a lot going on here that was not kosher but as a teen I was in no position to really question the officer. At least not on points of law. Today I would have refused the search. Not that Im hiding anything just I don’t want to give up my rights.
With all the BS about Terry stops, “probable cause”, 5th Amendment rights and simply not wanting to knuckle under to 'The Man", the simplest solution is the best.
Don’t carry anything incriminating in your car.
Then, all you have to say is “Knock yourself out, officer.”
But, you won’t buy that. This is America. We have rights. :rolleyes:
What, you got something against fertile octogenarians and precocious toddlers?
And Slothful Executors?
Yeah, because only guilty people need to worry about their rights.
Yes, a LAPD officer tried to tell me my regular Buck knife was a “switchblade” because if you held onto the blade and snapped the rest of the knife real hard you could open it with one hand.
Odd, but just a few threads ago, I told the story of my buddy from Nevada. He got pulled over in another neighboring state and since he had “nothing to hide” he consented to search. The Officer found a small pack of firecrackers which my friend had entirely forgotten about as they were 100% legal where he lived. Resulted in: They then put him in handcuffs and had his car impounded!
Yes, they reduced the charges to a infraction and a small fine, but he had to go through all the BS of getting his car back, paying bail and what not. Cost him 2 days and $1500. And this dude was 100% straight arrow who “thought he had nothing to hide”.
Are you 100% sure that no one else has hidden contraband in your car? Do you know the law so well in EVERY juristiction so that you KNOW you are doing nothing illegal? (One of my friends insists it is illegal to possess “foam type” containers in one CA juristiction!) It can be illgeal to own certain tools unless you have a license, or spray paint.
Thanks for reminding me about the spray paint. Here in the DC area “taggers” are a big problem. I had a technician I worked with get “arrested” for having spray paint in his car (plain sight, after a officer pulled him over for something. Probably ligit.) Note he missed the job I needed him to go to the next day because of this arrest.
The problem was he was covered in paint at night and in a neighborhood where “tagging” was a big issue. Granted the charges were dismissed when he went to court and proved that his paint was for work but thats a real pain to have to do. Not to mention as a tech he only got paid when he actually worked so there were lost wages in the process. BTW I know the story is true because I and my manager had to sign a statement for him to take to court that he used the paint that day for work he was doing for us.
I realize that this was a “plain sight” bust but how far a stretch would it be to go from that to a few cans of paint discovered in your trunk after giving consent to search.
I still maintain that despite not having anything to hide Im still not letting anyone search my car, or any other property, without just cause and the proper procedure being followed. After all I have to follow all the proper procedures for my job so should they.
Band name!