Why wouldn’t a LEO out of his jurisdiction have as much power as a bounty hunter?
Probably, the Feds would ask the local cops to arrest you as a favor until the FBI or whoever can sent a field agent to collect you.
IIRC, bounty hunters have special privileges which come from common law and only apply to the people they are chasing. They have much fewer restrictions than the police.
But if I elude the police in NJ and then slow down and drive normal in NY, what’s the police allowed to do? I don’t have to stop for a NJ police car in NY no matter how loud his siren, I assume (What’s the legal definition of emergency vehicle?). If murder suspects are allowed an extradition hearing to change states, presumably a traffic offense would require the same? And a NJ patrolman I assume cannot arrest me in NY if I did not violate NY law?
Regardless thumbing your nose at the police is probably not a good move.
BTW, there’s a movie about the reform process that eventually shut down Alcatraz, which starts with the fellow arrested during the depression; as a teenager, he and his brother robbed the local general store of $5. Because it was a post office outlet too, the prosecutor made it a federal crime and the kid spent 20 years in Alcatraz. At the time of the movie, he was charged with murder of another inmate and the trial exposed the complete brutality of the prison. Life in prison for stealing $5. Inspector Jalbert would be proud.
It sounds as if it might then be a criminal offense, in which case, wouldn’t they have the burden of proving that it was actually me driving the car the first time?
I guess that might be moot to some extent, though, because if the officer took note of my car he could always pull me over the next time I drove through and find (or invent) something to ticket me for.
If the officer testified it looked like you and that he got some glimpses of you, well - I guess the fun part would be proving he’s wrong if in fact it was you. Meanwhile, I’m sure they can impound your car for a few weeks to dust for fingerprints to see who else had been in it.
Like I said, taunting guys with guns and badges in not a good use of your time… not to mention what I call the “Oscar Wilde Principle”. It’s a bad idea to take things to court when you’re on the wrong side of the law.
A pursuit is defined by the fact that you are not pulling over. Your speed does not matter. I’ve had 35mph pursuits. So if he was committing offense the of eluding in NJ and then slowed down and still refuses to pull over in NY the pursuit hasn’t ended and the hot pursuit doctrine is still in effect. Of course NY cops will be called and not pulling over for them would also be an offense.
In practice, neither of these are correct.
From a friend who is a (now-retired) police officer in Minnesota, about a suspect who fled into Wisconsin. It was a hot pursuit of a suspected drunk driver (though he also committed the crime of attempting to elude and various traffic offenses while fleeing, both in MN & WI). The driver crossed the state line into Wisconsin. Minnesota police (County Sheriff officer (the original pursuit) & MN Highway Patrol) continued to pursue the criminal, and eventually forced him to stop, got him out of his vehicle at gunpoint, and placed him in handcuffs. All this before the Wisconsin Highway Patrol arrived (which had been alerted by the MN police).
But it was the Wisconsin officers who actually arrested him, and he was taken to a WI jail, and charged with DWI, etc. in Wisconsin. After that. the Minnesota police filed similar charges against him, and he was eventually extradited back to Minnesota to face those charges. (Eventually went onto his record as 2 DWI charges, one in each state.)
So even if legally MN officers have no jurisdiction in WI, in practice they still act as police, and can pursue & stop criminals. But the legal arrest will be done by a WI police officer.
IRS buildings as well.
I’m pretty sure the public access areas of a post office building would still be fair game for locals. Searching a PO box, not so much.
Failure to yield/eluding as you mentioned a felony. They are not in pursuit of a “minor traffic violation” they are now chasing someone committing felony evasion.
Not to mention most people who seriously attempt to evade police commit dozens of other far more serious/dangerous violations for every minute that it goes on.
The US Postal Inspection Service is the oldest federal law enforcement agency and they have jurisdiction on any crimes which involve the mail. Something the occurred at the post office that didn’t involve the mail would probably be handled locally unless it violated a federal statute.
Many Federal buildings. But they stop you at the gate in a Military base.
They would stop the bad guy too.
Well, yes and no. At my dads base the local cops were chasing one of the guys due to their infamous and rather illegal speed trap. He drove into his base, the guards closed the gate, and the cops could do nothing.One even drew his gun, which was stupid to do with four men with loaded M16s. But his parter told him off.
But a civilian? Sure.
And if it had been a real crime of course the base would have a talk with the soldier and it could even be worse for him.
But again, while “don’t try this at home, kids” … he was committing a crime in both states, so even a citizen’s arrest was valid. If I slow down and drive normal once I cross the state line, no DUI, am I obliged to stop for an out-of-state cop with their light flashing? Let alone, would there be grounds for extradition?
This makes no sense at all to me. There’s not a pursuit if there’s not a pursuer. Surely the cop has to decide whether to pursue or not, but how would choosing to pursue NOT be the same thing as initiating pursuit?
That might get into an entertaining discussion of how much latitude a law enforcement officer has in enforcing the law. Is he required to enforce all laws? Only the ones he likes? Only for people that look particularly shifty? Does it depend on the severity of the law in question? Can he make judgement calls on a safety or great good basis?
39 CFR 232.1 - Conduct on postal property lists a whole range of conduct prohibited within property owned or leased by the post office, including creating a disturbance, gambling, leafleting, carrying a weapon, etc. Subsection (p) says that “Alleged violations of these rules and regulations are heard, and the penalties prescribed herein are imposed, either in a Federal district court or by a Federal magistrate in accordance with applicable court rules,” while subsection (q) authorizes the Postal Service security force to enforce the rules, with the proviso that “Local postmasters and installation heads may, pursuant to 40 U.S.C. 1315(d)(3) and with the approval of the chief postal inspector or his designee, enter into agreements with State and local enforcement agencies to insure that these rules and regulations are enforced.”
Cops ARE allowed to either forego or end hot pursuit without capturing the offender on the basis of safety.