PDA

View Full Version : Rolled on 4th july but can the CHP do this?



spoolinalltheway
07-05-2007, 04:42 PM
I was getting on 680 south from mission Blvd and sped up to get onto fast lane. Was cruising 80+mph then out of the blue a chp came up behind. He mustve been hiding on the slow lane with the other cars giving him camo. Flashed his lights and i pulled to the side.

He comes to my passenger side window where my gf was sitting and aks for my license ins and reg. I tell him that my insurance and reg is in the glove box so i ask him "if i can open my glove box". He says okay..(now here comes the dick part) i open my glove box and i take out my insurance and reg. As i pull theh insurance and reg out the CHP sees an old ticket. He puts his arm through my window IN FRONT OF MY GF and takes the old ticket from my glove box. he takes a look at it and says to me "i see your getting bad luck" and puts it back in my glove box.

He writes my ticket for going 80+mph which was my fault and end of story.

The only thing that ticks me off is the officer putting his arm through my window and gets an old ticket from MY GLOVE BOX!!! I know he cant do that because he needs have probable cause! He did this witout asking! Officers can only look at the inside of your car and can not search inside. im not saying he searched my car but he did not have no right to just take any papers from glove box. Now the question is: Should i do something about it! Or just let it go!!! I know if you guys were to get pulled over and the cop comes to your window and sticks his arm through to touch something inside you would feel violated!!!

PANGES
07-05-2007, 04:44 PM
hmmm... I've never had that happen to me before... let us know how it goes!

byt
07-05-2007, 04:47 PM
you can file a complaint but that is something independent of your wrongdoing (speeding in this case)

RgistRdShowoffIX
07-05-2007, 04:48 PM
Under the part in the book that says that anything within sight is fair game for officers that might be legal but I personally think that's over-stepping authority. Â*:?

spoolinalltheway
07-05-2007, 04:50 PM
Under the part in the book that says that anything within sight is fair game for officers that might be legal but I personally think that's over-stepping authority. :?


Yea i know!! I mean if he asked me what was that..i would greatly tell him it was an old ticket!!

RgistRdShowoffIX
07-05-2007, 04:52 PM
You can do what byt said and file a complaint. But that's as much as you can go..

ReSin
07-05-2007, 04:54 PM
If he didn't ask, he shouldn't be reaching into your kaa, unless it is life threatening or has probably cause to search your vehicle...

Â* Dennis

RgistRdShowoffIX
07-05-2007, 04:55 PM
My solution... I don't keep my old tickets in my car. lol I tack them up on my wall.

Iono.. I don't like random paper clutter in my car.

Ben
07-05-2007, 05:06 PM
I remember watching a video a long time ago about protecting your rights as a driver and one of the things they said was that if the officer can reach in then they can. What you're supposed to do is leave your window open enough to speak with the officer and hand him your information. If the window is wide open then its fair game I guess. Anyways, did he obstruct any of your rights or anything? I bet it was annoying but I don't think he took away any of your civil liberties so why waste anyones time filing a report for a cop picking something up, making a remark, then putting it back down?

spoolinalltheway
07-05-2007, 05:09 PM
I remember watching a video a long time ago about protecting your rights as a driver and one of the things they said was that if the officer can reach in then they can. What you're supposed to do is leave your window open enough to speak with the officer and hand him your information. If the window is wide open then its fair game I guess. Anyways, did he obstruct any of your rights or anything? I bet it was annoying but I don't think he took away any of your civil liberties so why waste anyones time filing a report for a cop picking something up, making a remark, then putting it back down?


Yes, i was very annoyed! but what can you do cops are cops. they will always try to over use their authority. I just need to pay that them ticket and do traffic school.

mtsevovii
07-05-2007, 06:36 PM
i dont see anything wrong. it was in plain view of the cop. anything in plain view is his to search, thats enough probable cause.

ie: officer knocks at your door, sees a bag that looks like weed in your house on the table in plain view, he can enter your house w/o warrant to retrieve the weed. and charge you for possession. However that doesnt give him the right to search your entire house, closet etc.. he would need a warrant for that.

so in plain sight he could have done what he did.

he could also have done this:

asked you to step out. handcuff both you and your gf. place you guys next to the car, and search your vehicle openly without opening your hood/trunk. and if your glove box is open, he is welcome to search that too.

Kings Fan
07-05-2007, 07:16 PM
It doesn't seem like its that big of a deal, just let it go...

chrisw
07-05-2007, 07:31 PM
that's why I don't keep the insurance and reg in the glove box...

mtsevovii
07-05-2007, 07:33 PM
that's why I don't keep the insurance and reg in the glove box...Â*


:lol: thats why i dont keep tickets and pistols in my glove box ;)

steevo8
07-05-2007, 08:22 PM
I think it states "anything in plain view or reach is admissible evidence". If you really want to know exactly I can look it up for you...?

esco
07-06-2007, 01:37 AM
He is not allowed to do that, all officers MUST let you know that they are searching the vehicle, or you have given them probable cause otherwise. (drugs, weapons, illegal fireworks etc)


think of how many times if you have ever seen cops they say "do you have anything in the car I need to be aware of?" and then they search your car.


they must get permission to enter your vehicle unless you have commited a serious offense or even gave him a reason to suspect something.

gbpkr
07-06-2007, 03:39 AM
There was nothing wrong with what he did...well besides being extremely rude and pissing you off. The ticket was in plain view....He did not reach in and open the glove box...did he?


You could make a complaint but he can easily counter it by saying he saw the ticket and he wanted to confirm what you had been cited for recently or he wanted to confirm your identity on the ticket...I could go on and on....There are literally thousands of legitimate reasons to grab that ticket.

Don't keep tickets in the car or keep the windows up.

steevo8
07-06-2007, 08:30 AM
the one thing that esco isnt considering is that fact that, if you dont have to uncover, unlock, open, anything then its not considered a search. He just simply took advantage of a oppurtunity you gave him. Rude and rather f-ed up? Yes of course. But against the law? No.

mtsevovii
07-06-2007, 08:36 AM
the one thing that esco isnt considering is that fact that, if you dont have to uncover, unlock, open, anything then its not considered a search. He just simply took advantage of a oppurtunity you gave him. Rude and rather f-ed up? Yes of course. But against the law? No.


+1

just as if you "accidentally" pulled the trunk lever and your trunk popped open. he can now look in without a warrant to search. your mistake is his gain.

he wouldnt have been allowed to open your glovebox if it was closed, but you opened it for him...

SilverStreak
07-06-2007, 08:42 AM
what he did was pretty messed up, but perfectly within his rights.

as mentioned earlier, anything in plain sight or reach is considered "evidence" or searchable since it is not hidden.

if there is enough room to reach in, he's allowed to. on some "what to do when pulled over" tapes they recommend to only roll down the windows low enough to slide your license and registration through, nothing more than that to prevent something like this.

I doubt it affected the outcome of the situation, but if you honestly weren't comfortable, you could always file a complaint.

in regards to "accidentally" popping the trunk or something. It falls under the category of "tough luck". if you were hiding drugs that accidently fell out, they wouldn't cut you any slack. same case regarding the trunk.

esco
07-06-2007, 03:40 PM
check this

Police do not need a search warrant to search a vehicle they stop on the road or in a non-residential area if they have probable cause to believe it contains contraband or evidence of a crime. In that case, police may search the passenger compartment and any open containers inside the vehicle.

Police do not need a search warrant, or even probable cause, to perform a limited search of a suspect's outer clothing for weapons, if police have a reasonable suspicion to justify the intrusion - a Terry 'stop and frisk.'

Under the Fourth Amendment searches must be reasonable and specific. This means that a search warrant must be specific as to the specified object to be searched for and the place to be searched. Other items, rooms, outbuildings, persons, vehicles, etc. would require a second search warrant.


then this

A SEARCH is by definition an invasion of privacy. Prior to Katz v. U.S. (1967), privacy was defined in terms of the trespass doctrine, but since then, a "reasonable expectation of privacy" doctrine has prevailed. Only what people themselves deem "private" and what society recognizes as private are protected. The Fourth Amendment does NOT protect against all invasions of privacy; it only forbids unreasonable invasions of privacy; and in the almost 40 years since Katz, the Supreme Court has held steadfast to a presumption of unreasonableness whenever privacy expectations are violated in a warrantless search or surveillance situation. It is important to note that the issue of concern is privacy expectation, and not the actual intrusion (trespass), be it physical or electronic. In terms of Supreme Court jurisprudence, this means that a very strict interpretation of the Fourth Amendment is followed: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrant shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." In Katz, the government argued that it could police itself and that good intentions should outweigh any constitutional precondition for always getting a warrant, but the Supreme Court rejected those arguments. However, there clearly are exceptions, such as consent, emergency, search incident to arrest, motor vehicle, and inventory, as well as special circumstances in fires and disasters. This lecture explores some of those exceptions.

Matz
07-06-2007, 04:02 PM
I'll let a cop search and take anything out of my car, as long as I don't have to go to the state ref. ;)

Evo9R
07-06-2007, 04:11 PM
+1

Ben
07-06-2007, 04:23 PM
This is why if I get pulled over the windows are only open enough for the cop to hear me and for me to hand him my info. The only time I've been asked to step out of the car (drunk test) I made sure to close the windowds and shut and lock the doors to the car. I don't carry anything illegal but I don't like cops snooping and if anything is open on your car they can freely reach in or look around.