minor run in with security guard at sheetz

imported post

Ghettokracker71 wrote:

At least the guard didnt go bonkers and try to detain you for the LEOs to show and ask for your CHP and all that mess

Click to expand...

Do security guards have any legal authority to detain you?

imported post

They can only detain you if you have committed a crime, i.e. shoplifting, etc. Otherwise it is a false arrest and you can sue the heck of the company for $.

imported post

robertnmjr wrote:

i told him that VA law stated that i could carry a weapon unless the owner has it posted.

Click to expand...

Virginia statutes are silent on signage.

I kind of hate bringing up lack of signage b/c that encourages them to post.

Maybe say somthing like "I am unaware oif any Sheetz Corp. policy banning constitutional rights - you had better go check your sources," and then leave.

imported post

Scheetz wrote:

I'll have a chat with that guard.  Because my policy is to strictly allow open carriers on premise. 



:lol:

Click to expand...

hah

imported post

mlands wrote:

They can only detain you if you have committed a crime, i.e. shoplifting, etc. Otherwise it is a false arrest and you can sue the heck of the company for $.

Click to expand...

Correct.. But only for theft violations and then only for one hour.

§ 18.2-105.1. Detention of suspected shoplifter.

A merchant, agent or employee of the merchant, who has probable cause to believe that a person has shoplifted in violation of § 18.2-95 or § 18.2-96 or § 18.2-103, on the premises of the merchant, may detain such person for a period not to exceed one hour pending arrival of a law-enforcement officer.

§ 18.2-95. Grand larceny defined; how punished.

§ 18.2-96. Petit larceny defined; how punished.

§ 18.2-103. Concealing or taking possession of merchandise; altering price tags; transferring goods from one container to another; counseling, etc., another in performance of such acts.

imported post

Security guards.

I always think of that mall rent-a-cop in Commando when he sees Arnold and says to the girls around him, "Wanna see me kick some ass".

imported post

LEO 229 wrote:

mlands wrote:

They can only detain you if you have committed a crime, i.e. shoplifting, etc. Otherwise it is a false arrest and you can sue the heck of the company for $.

Click to expand...

Correct.. But only for theft violations and then only for one hour.

§ 18.2-105.1. § 18.2-95 or § 18.2-96 or § 18.2-103,
§ 18.2-95. § 18.2-96. § 18.2-103.

Click to expand...

If you are detained illegal, CALL THE POLICE yourself immediately.

Press charges against the security guard/store mgr. or employee.
I believe the charge will be False Imprisonment/ Unlawful Detention if they touch you add Battery.

imported post

Agent19 wrote:

LEO 229 wrote:

mlands wrote:

They can only detain you if you have committed a crime, i.e. shoplifting, etc. Otherwise it is a false arrest and you can sue the heck of the company for $.

Click to expand...

Correct.. But only for theft violations and then only for one hour.

§ 18.2-105.1. § 18.2-95 or § 18.2-96 or § 18.2-103,
§ 18.2-95. § 18.2-96. § 18.2-103.

Click to expand...

If you are detained illegal, CALL THE POLICE yourself immediately.

Press charges against the security guard/store mgr. or employee.
I believe the charge will be False Imprisonment/ Unlawful Detention if they touch you add Battery.

Click to expand...

What about a citizen's arrest for a non-larceny charge????

For say... Assaulting an employee or customer, molesting a child, destroying property, credit card fraud, passing counterfeit checks.....

If your being detained by the store... I am sure they will be calling the police. They most likely called before you were even approached.

imported post

LEO I have always wanted to know. How do you go about holding someone under citizens arrest?

imported post

Scheetz wrote:

LEO I have always wanted to know. How do you go about holding someone under citizens arrest?

Click to expand...

http://www.criminalattorney.com/pages/firm_articles_citizens_arrest.htm

The process and legality of a citizens arrest varies from State to State. That link gives you a general idea what the process is, and what it isn't. One thing to note is that technically an arrest involves seizing and moving someone, without their consent, to a judicial official, while detaining someone only involves a seizure of a suspect w/o moving the suspect. So generally you wouldn't be making a full arrest, but rather simply detaining them until law enforcement arrives.

The most dangerous part about making a citizens arrest or the like is that you don't have the same protection that LEOs do. If a LEO makes an arrest based on legitimate probable cause, but it turns out later that the suspect committed no crime, that LEO cannot be charged with anything. If a citizen, on the other hand, detains or arrests someone, even with what could be described as probably cause, and it turns out that person hadn't committed any crime, the citizen could be charged with anything from unlawful arrest to, in some cases, kidnapping.

imported post

LEO 229 wrote:

mlands wrote:

They can only detain you if you have committed a crime, i.e. shoplifting, etc. Otherwise it is a false arrest and you can sue the heck of the company for $.

Click to expand...

Correct.. But only for theft violations and then only for one hour.

§ 18.2-105.1. Detention of suspected shoplifter.

A merchant, agent or employee of the merchant, who has probable cause to believe that a person has shoplifted in violation of § 18.2-95 or § 18.2-96 or § 18.2-103, on the premises of the merchant, may detain such person for a period not to exceed one hour pending arrival of a law-enforcement officer.

§ 18.2-95. Grand larceny defined; how punished.

§ 18.2-96. Petit larceny defined; how punished.

§ 18.2-103. Concealing or taking possession of merchandise; altering price tags; transferring goods from one container to another; counseling, etc., another in performance of such acts.

Click to expand...

May want to add this to thelist also:
§ 9.1-146. Limitation on powers of registered armed security officers.

Compliance with the provisions of this article shall not itself authorize any person to carry a concealed weapon or exercise any powers of a conservator of the peace. A registered armed security officer of a private security services business while at a location which the business is contracted to protect shall have the power to effect an arrest for an offense occurring (i) in his presence on such premises or (ii) in the presence of a merchant, agent, or employee of the merchant the private security business has contracted to protect, if the merchant, agent, or employee had probable cause to believe that the person arrested had shoplifted or committed willful concealment of goods as contemplated by § 18.2-106. For the purposes of § 19.2-74, a registered armed security officer of a private security services business shall be considered an arresting officer.

(1976, c. 737, § 54-729.33; 1978, c. 560, § 54.1-1907; 1980, c. 425; 1988, cc. 48, 765; 1992, c. 578, § 9-183.8; 1994, c. 45; 2001, c. 844.)

I have been told by DCJS instructors that the phrase "power to effect an arrest for an offense occurring (i) in his presence on such premises " allows armed guards to arrest someone for any felony and some misdemeanors in addition to just shoplifting.

DCJS does have a course (O5E for Armed Security) that goes into arrest authority/power. I'll know more - have to take the course in a couple of weeks.

imported post

DreQo wrote:

Scheetz wrote:

LEO I have always wanted to know. How do you go about holding someone under citizens arrest?

Click to expand...

http://www.criminalattorney.com/pages/firm_articles_citizens_arrest.htm

The process and legality of a citizens arrest varies from State to State. That link gives you a general idea what the process is, and what it isn't. One thing to note is that technically an arrest involves seizing and moving someone, without their consent, to a judicial official, while detaining someone only involves a seizure of a suspect w/o moving the suspect. So generally you wouldn't be making a full arrest, but rather simply detaining them until law enforcement arrives.

The most dangerous part about making a citizens arrest or the like is that you don't have the same protection that LEOs do. If a LEO makes an arrest based on legitimate probable cause, but it turns out later that the suspect committed no crime, that LEO cannot be charged with anything. If a citizen, on the other hand, detains or arrests someone, even with what could be described as probably cause, and it turns out that person hadn't committed any crime, the citizen could be charged with anything from unlawful arrest to, in some cases, kidnapping.

Click to expand...

Great article! Does anyone know about the laws in Virginia concerning a citizens arrest? I have been searching for info on it for awhile, but can't find anything on VA specifically.

imported post

I tried to search for VA's laws on it after the question was posed here, but couldn't find anything specific, hence my previous post. Coincidently enough, I just got done studying NC's laws on the issue earlier today. NC, I believe, is the ONLY state where citizen's arrest does not exist. A citizen may only detain a suspect, which is why the distinction between the two is so important.

imported post

Virginia recognizes the common-law concept of citizen's arrest. A citizen (even a security guard) may perform anarrest for a felony or a breach of the peace occurring in his presence.

Hudson v. Commonwealth of Virginia (Va., 2003)

imported post

W.E.G. wrote:

Virginia recognizes the common-law concept of citizen's arrest. A citizen (even a security guard) may perform anarrest for a felony or a breach of the peace occurring in his presence.

Hudson v. Commonwealth of Virginia (Va., 2003)

Click to expand...

Thanks for the case. Here is the rellevant parts I found from Hudson. I imagine that you would get a more complete understanding of VA's citizen arrest limitations in the cited cases (I don't have time to read them right now).

Commonwealth v. Hudson, 265 Va. 505, 578 S.E.2d 781 (2003) (and on FindLaw here)

Hudson contends that even if Officer Wills had the authority as a private citizen to make a citizen's arrest, that he was still not required to take a test under Code  18.2-268.2(B). Hudson's rationale is that he could not be the subject of a lawful citizen's arrest as his actions were not a felony. He distinguishes our prior decision in Tharp v. Commonwealth, 221 Va. 487, 270 S.E.2d 752 (1980), and the Court of Appeals' decision in Hall v. Commonwealth, 12 Va. App. 559, 389 S.E.2d 921 (1990), aff'd en banc, Record Nos. 0963-88-1, 0964-88-1 (June 12, 1990), because those cases involved a police officer, acting outside of his territorial authority, who made a citizen's arrest for a felony. Hudson's argument fails because a citizen's arrest can be made for a breach of the peace, as occurred in this case, as well as a felony.
At common law, a private citizen may arrest another for a breach of the peace committed in his presence. See Gustke, 516 S.E.2d at 291-92; see also Carroll v. United States, 267 U.S. 132, 156-57 (1925) (" 'In cases of misdemeanor, a peace officer like a private person has at common law no power of arresting without a warrant except when a breach of the peace has been committed in his presence . . . .' " (quoting 9 Halsbury's Laws of England 612)); accord W. Page Keeton, ed., Prosser and Keeton on the Law of Torts  26 (5th ed. 1984) ("Broadly speaking, either an officer or a private citizen may arrest without a warrant to prevent a felony or a breach of the peace which is being committed . . . in his presence.") (footnotes omitted)....

...

The common law in Virginia permits a citizen to effect an arrest for a breach of the peace occurring in his or her presence.

Click to expand...

imported post

nvm

imported post

As a former security officer (early 90s) I can tell you that armed SOs can arrest for any offense occuring on a property they are contracted to protect. If it's a felony arrest, it will get turned over to a detective and Commonwealth's attorney to prosecute. Something about how SOs, and/or citizens in general, can't swear out a criminal complaint on a felony, it has to be "processed" by the LEOs. Maybe LEO229 can explain? Misdemeanors may be prosecuted by the SO or CA depending on jurisdictional rules.

imported post

Agent19 wrote:

LEO 229 wrote:

Agent19 wrote:

If you are detained illegally, CALL THE POLICE yourself immediately.

Click to expand...

What about a citizen's arrest for a non-larceny charge????

For say... Assaulting an employee or customer, molesting a child, destroying property, credit card fraud, passing counterfeit checks.....

If your being detained by the store... I am sure they will be calling the police. They most likely called before you were even approached.

Click to expand...

those wouldn't not be illegal detentions.
they usually don't the callpolice until they got their ducks in a row.
i suggest calling when a mgr./employee/security suggest you did something wrong
ask if your free to leave:exclaim: anything other then yes suggest a detention. they will have to prove the reason for the detention

Click to expand...

If you have not broken any laws... I would suggest you call too.

I am not sure about stores having any ducks tat need to be lined up. Either your suspected of a crime or your not. IN either case I am sure they will call Five-O.

If the store has tackled you... I am sure your NOT free to leave. Furthermore... one citizen asking another if they are free to leave is pointless. This may work with the police when your not sure if you can go. But with a store employee.... holding you down or taking you to the security office... I can pretty much assume your not free to go anywhere.

imported post

Utah code concerning Citizens Arrest:

77-7-1 "Arrest" defined - Restraint allowed.

An arrest is an actual restraint of the person arrested or submission to custody. The person shall not be subjected to any more restraint than is necessary for his arrest and detention.


77-7-3 By private persons.

A private person may arrest another:
(1) For a public offense committed or attempted in his presence; or
(2) When a felony has been committed and he has reasonable cause to believe the person arrested has committed it.

77-7-6 Manner of making arrest.

(1) The person making the arrest shall inform the person being arrested of his intention, cause, and authority to arrest him. Such notice shall not be required when:
(a) there is reason to believe the notice will endanger the life or safety of the officer or another person or will likely enable the party being arrested to escape;
(b) the person being arrested is actually engaged in the commission of, or an attempt to commit, an offense; or
(c) the person being arrested is pursued immediately after the commission of an offense or an escape.
(2) (a) If a hearing-impaired person, as defined in Subsection 78-24a-1 (2), is arrested for an alleged violation of a criminal law, including a local ordinance, the arresting officer shall assess the communicative abilities of the hearing-impaired person and conduct this notification, and any further notifications of rights, warnings, interrogations, or taking of statements, in a manner that accurately and effectively communicates with the hearing-impaired person including qualified interpreters, lip reading, pen and paper, typewriters, computers with print-out capability, and telecommunications devices for the deaf.
(b) Compliance with this subsection is a factor to be considered by any court when evaluating whether statements of a hearing-impaired person were made knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently.
1995

77-7-7 Force in making arrest.
If a person is being arrested and flees or forcibly resists after being informed of the intention to make the arrest, the person arresting may use reasonable force to effect the arrest. Deadly force may be used only as provided in Section 76-2-404 ***.

77-7-9 Weapons may be taken from prisoner.

Any person making an arrest may seize from the person arrested all weapons which he may have on or about his person.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


***76-2-404. Peace officer's use of deadly force.
(1) A peace officer, or any person acting by his command in his aid and assistance, is justified in using deadly force when:
(a) the officer is acting in obedience to and in accordance with the judgment of a competent court in executing a penalty of death under Subsection 77-18-5.5(3) or (4);
(b) effecting an arrest or preventing an escape from custody following an arrest, where the officer reasonably believes that deadly force is necessary to prevent the arrest from being defeated by escape; and
(i) the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect has committed a felony offense involving the infliction or threatened infliction of death or serious bodily injury; or
(ii) the officer has probable cause to believe the suspect poses a threat of death or serious bodily injury to the officer or to others if apprehension is delayed; or
(c) the officer reasonably believes that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent death or serious bodily injury to the officer or another person.
(2) If feasible, a verbal warning should be given by the officer prior to any use of deadly force under Subsection (1)(b) or (1)(c).


Amended by Chapter 51, 2004 General Session
Download Code Section Zipped WP 6/7/8 76_02024.ZIP 2,262 Bytes


[line]
Sections in this Chapter|Chapters in this Title|All Titles|Legislative Home Page

Last revised: Thursday, July 19, 2007

imported post

:dude::dude::dude::arrow:r :?