I was recently stopped by a patrol officer. The officer said that I was driving on the shoulder of the roadway. My wife was in the car and we both think that was BS. While stopped the officer gave me a field sobriety test because I had wine with dinner and he could smell it.
Two questions:
Can the officer legally ask me to roll my window down all the way as opposed to just enough to communicate and give him my ID and Registration?
Can the officer prevent me from putting my hands in my pockets while standing outside of the car on a cold night.
I know this sounds a bit trivial, but I’m just curious if the “requests” where legal or not because they where presented as demands and I complied.
By the way, he gave me a breath test and I was .2 and drove away scottfree.
No idea where you are, and this response may be valid only in the US: Once you’re pulled over, you’re legally detained and the officer is conducting an investigation. You are required to comply with any reasonable and lawful instructions, which both of those would be.
And, I hope you meant .02; if you really blew a .2 I’m glad I wasn’t down the street from you! 
It is pretty much irrelevant whether the officer can force you to roll down the window, because they can force you to exit the vehicle. See Pennsylvania v Mimms.
IMO, not rolling the window down all the way when asked makes you look like an asshole to the cop and will pretty much guarantee them finding some way to shit on your day. Don’t ever get into a pissing contest with a cop, you will lose every time.
Keeping your hands out of your pockets is an officer safety issue. Refusing to do so when so ordered can result in some rather uncomfortable forced repositioning. You’d probably be better off sticking them into your armpits if they get cold.
It might be that you drifted unknowingly over the “fog line,” the white line that marks the outer edge of the driving lane. This is one of the things that tips patrol officers off to distracted or impaired drivers. A lot of people do this when they’re on a cell phone. If you’re not impaired or doing something you shouldn’t be doing, it only makes sense to cooperate so you and the officer can be on your respective ways. He’s just doing the job you or your neighbors are paying him to do.
This sounds like a textbook traffic stop to me. The officer noticed driving patterns that often reflect an under-the-influence or otherwise-distracted driver and appropriately pulled the driver over. Upon approaching the driver’s window, the officer notices a smell of alcohol, which would further confirm his initial suspicions of DUI.
Upon pulling the driver out of the vehicle and in the process of completing a field sobriety test, the officer tells the driver to keep his hands visible and out of his pockets; as this ensures both the officers’ and the drivers’ safety to be sure of no concealed contraband/weapons. After the field test and breathalyzer come back negative, the officer lets the driver on his way unfettered.
I’m not one to never criticize a police officer’s actions, if those actions warrant such criticism. However, this instance seems to illustrate exactly what a police officer should do. It’s why we have them out there on the road.
The others are correct. Most any request can be asked legally, the question is, is compliance mandatory. The Courts tend not to second guess field stops as to what is a lawful order or not unless it is just plain unconstitutional.
If you did not comply with the above, most assuredly, as stated, you would have been ordered out. Aside from a Mimms order, let’s say you refused to roll down the window where inside visibility was good, you may face a general obstruction charge or some charge of similar import.
I don’t recall ever reading any “specific” case law on that when a person was arrested for obstruction, etc., but the same legal principle applies. An order is legal and mandates compliance if it is reasonably related to a person’s detainment and subsequent investigation. A traffic stop is more in line with what is known as a Terry Stop, probable cause is not needed to stop you, but it can form the basis, yes.
Sure, there may be a fine line at times, but a straight up officer will not order anyone to do anything degrading.
The legal standard for a stop, traffic or otherwise, is reasonable suspicion that an unlawful act is occurring or is about to occur. This is a much lower standard than probably cause but is still a standard.
However as already noted, courts tend to take the word of the officer as to what actually occurred. So if he claims you were weaving, driving on the shoulder, etc, that claim is likely going to go unchallenged.
As several others have noted, traffic officers are trained to look for any small waiver in the way the vehicle tracks, whether drifting, speeding up or slowing down inappropriately, etc. Any and or all of those can (and frequently do) indicate inattentive or impaired drivers. While those may be reasons for stopping a driver, the criteria for actually citing or arresting drivers must a higher standard.
As a court administrator I can say that our judge doesn’t always take the officer’s word for the facts surrounding a case. If the driver can present a good argument for why he shouldn’t have been stopped or cited, he can win his case regardless of the officer.
The request to keep your hands out of your pockets is truly an officer safety issue. Police officers are always on edge and as we’re learning more and more frequently, the often have targets on their backs. They’re frequently alone when making traffic stops and they’re often the only one they have to depend on for their own safety.
4 months shy of 30 years with a badge:
Yes.
Yes.
And the answer to your next post of “what if I don’t” is, you’ll get decentralized to the floor (AKA knocked on your ass to the ground) arrested and charged with any one or all of a variety of things. And the lawyer you whine to afterwards will listen to your story about it, blow smoke up your (recently knock down on) ass, and send you a bill for hundreds (if not thousands) of dollars, and you’ll still end up paying a fine and/or spending some time in jail.
Sorry for having to tell you the horrible truth.
I was stopped once by an Ohio Highway Patrolman. He claimed I was weaving, which I may have been while blowing my nose, but it was not that bad if I was. Then he stated I was going 55 in a 65 zone. Now, to the untrained, that would have been, “say what, what is illegal about doing 55 when the minimum is 40”?
He was looking at the “totality of the circumstances” to conduct an investigatory stop to see if I was DUI. Since DUI suspects usually drive slower, coupled with my alleged weaving, it formed the proper basis for a stop. I had no problem with it. He did nothing outside the Ohio or federal constitution, so it was good police work. The detainment, per the Constitution, lasted only enough time to complete the original purpose of the stop.
Agreed. While there is nothing in the actual wording of the 4th AM about arrest warrants or an arrest itself, just search warrants, the SC has ruled probable cause must exist for an on spot arrest or the issuance of an arrest warrant.
Muni court magistrate here. Sounds like the officer did just what he’d been (properly) trained to do.
And if it ever comes down to your word against the cop’s: I’ve believed some cops and disbelieved others, just like I’ve believed some defendants and disbelieved others. You are entitled to, and should receive, equal justice under the law. If the result of a trial or hearing is preordained, why bother having one?
Or, it could be chickenshit power trip. Not attacking you or your post, but how many cops would puff up out of your sheer nerve rather than an actual safety issue.
Besides, being a cop isn’t actually all that dangerous, comparatively. 
I don’t have a problem with the window or the pocket hands. I’d have been annoyed that after I performed and passed a degrading and potentially subjective field sobriety exam, I’d then be compelled to perform a breathalyzer test. It seems like this could have been performed at the start and the whole stop taken, what, 25% as long as otherwise? Get the exculpatory stuff out of the way first and no one has to have cold hands and voice annoyance on messageboards.
Bolding mine;
A Portable Breath Test cannot just be arbitrarily administered at the beginning of the stop. The officer has to build the groundwork for using a PBT. Slurred speech, an inability to stand up straight, horizontal gaze, etc., has to be observed while talking with the driver. Odor of intoxicants is not sufficient all by itself, with the exception for people who are not supposed to have any alcohol whatsoever (minors, people on probation, etc.). There have been court cases on this regarding officers who used PBT in the very beginning of the stop.
My reaction to most people think a cop lied/made up a reason to pull them over (not DWB cases - these are DWW) is that why bother? It isn’t like they really have a hard time finding someone breaking a traffic law. He may have been wrong, mistaken or whatnot - but I think in most cases they are just doing their job.
Don’t get me wrong - I think plenty will lie in court - just they don’t need to when they pull you over.
As a practical matter - cops are scared of getting shot. I keep both hands on the steering wheel, put the light on (at night), and have the window rolled down by the time they get there. When I was younger - I was more reckless with the driving than I am now (I haven’t been pulled over in a long time. I think I was pulled over ~ 10 times - and either got a ticket for something minor (not having my registration) - or a warning all but one of those.
Also - it is just as much of an inconvenience for them as it is for you.
Anything you do that is out of the ordinary and makes them worried about their safety - triggers the training reaction in them - once you get to a certain point - you are going to end up in cuffs, tasered, or worse 
Some of the stuff they do might not always make sense (like not using the breathalyzer first), but most of the time there is a reason for it.
I’m sorry but I have to laugh at this. Every driver weaves, espically if you have a car with wide tires, which a lot of cars do now a days. There is no training involved, they just made a standard that allows them to pull anybody over at anytime, a catch all. Basically trolling, if you pull over enough people, one of them is bound to be doing something wrong.
Recently,I got pulled over on my way to my graveyard workshift, stone sober. The cop said he pulled me over because I “drifted over the white line a little bit”, then asked me if I had been drinking. I’m subject to random drug and alcohol testing at my job, and would never drink before going to work. I said no of course, and rolled my eyes.
Guess what day it was? December 31 at 11:30 PM.
That’s some really advanced training there.
You can’t honestly believe this. Give me a fucking break. You think the police have nothing better to do than to drive around pulling people over for no reason at all other than to “beat the odds” and eventually catch a bad guy? That’s laughable.
Is it?
We all know the police don’t prevent any crimes, they just respond to them. How do you explain all the random DWI patrols, and all the resources devoted to it.
Isn’t that all about beating the odds? Isn’t their time better spent catching the bad guys?
Why bother pulling innocent people over when there are plenty of assholes breaking traffic laws all day long? It can’t possibly take more than 15 minutes to find someone legitimately breaking a traffic law. These stops take time - seems like those people would be more likely lead to bigger crimes than some totally innocent random person.
Doesn’t make sense. I don’t even bother to slow down around cops - if I am not going like 20 miles over the speed limit - they simply won’t pull me over.
I think my story in my post proves that they will pull over innocent people. I broke no laws, and I wasn’t driving like an asshole. They troll.
That cop just used his “training” to say my right tires went over the whitle line by an inch. I don’t know what world you live in, but this kind of thing happens every day to inocent people in mine.
I guess next your going to tell me you don’t weave at all when you drive.