Stop and ID

[peter nap]

This message is hidden because NovaCop10 is on your ignore list.

I'm sorry, I couldn't understand a word you said:lol:

 

[Repeater]

There is a ton of case law concerning vehicle stops. You are right, leos can detain, order out, drivers and passengers of vehicles during a lawful stop (ras only needed for traffic) check pa v mimms and md v wilson. Rarely is a search warrant used to search cars.... Check out carrol doctrine, inventory search, pc based on scope (usually drug offenses), police k9 hits, and remember that Terry applies to traffic stops as well.

It's usually pretty easy to figure out a legal way to search a car if you are a Leo. However, you don't automatically get to search the car just because you arrested the driver (recent case Arizona v gant).

Check out:
Pa v mimms
Md v Wilson
Us v stanfield
Preston v us
White v commonwealth of Va
King v commonwealth of Va
Many more, interesting readings

Please don't forget:

Knowles v. Iowa

 

[thaJack]

As much as I dislike that the guy was detained for legal actions on his part, the officers did NOT do anything wrong.

1. They (incorrectly) believed they had RAS.
2. They detained the gentleman for further investigation.
3. They contacted the appropriate parties to determine charges.
4. They could not come to a suitable charge.
5. They subsequently released the gentleman from custody.

That is supposed to be how it works when you've done nothing wrong but the authorities believe you did. Upon doing their part in a timely manner and finding they are mistaken, they let you go.

Perhaps an apology for the inconvenience would be in order as a matter of courtesy. But I don't see they did anything legally wrong.

The interesting thing will be to see if Roanoke City does it again. If so, you can start to show pattern, which was a key element missing from this particular case.