Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 40

Thread: LEO Encounter in my Front Yard!! O.O

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Galt, CA, ,
    Posts
    13

    Post imported post

    Yeah,I was out waxing my car in front of my houseon the morning ofApril 19th (I was on the street, too bad I didn't do it in the driveway, that would have been even better). I was UOC, as I sometimes do. Sure enough,a cop decided to stop by. He took my gun and I pressed record on my voice recorder and set it on my car. Another cop pulled up. They gave me the "why do you need a gun to wax your car" line. They didn't like I was recording the encounter (saying it was illegal) and one cop picked up my recorder and set it back down and it slid off the car into the ground.He said, "Oops" sarcastically. (I asked him why he knocked off my recorder. And he said it slid off the car because of my wax job.) I asked if I was being detained, and one cop said "yes". I asked what I was being detained for and they said "cause you're waxing your car with a gun". I said "that isn't against the law, can you specifically tell me which law you believe I have broken?" They couldn't, but kept saying how you never see something like this and it disturbs the people in the neighborhood.

    One copkept saying I had a loadedgun,because I had ammo with me on my belt (clearly he misunderstands the law). They also said I might be breaking a city ordinance (I'm not I checked). One cop was saying that my shirt partial conceals my handgun, but it does not in the slightest. I was sure to wear a carefully selected shirt. Theycalled in the situation, butcouldn't find any reason toarrest me.They said the DA will get back to me if they find anything.

    The cop wouldn't hand me my firearm, instead he went to the passenger side of the car I was waxing, opened the door, and set the gun between the passenger seat and the door, half-way under the seat,saying it was for his protection and I could get it after he left. Then he left. Well, he placed that gun IMO in a concealed spot, whichisillegal, possibly entrapping me. I'm not saying they were trying to set me up, but that is poor judgement for an officer of the law. I returned the gun to my holster.

    A total of four police cars came by, but only two officers delt with me. I will be filing complaints with several peoplefor this police misconduct. For one, detaining me without reasonable suspicion of a crime (fixed, thanks bigtoe). Another for touching my voice recorder and causing it to fall. Another for taking my firearm without consent to run a background check. Another for accessing my car without permission, and for not returning my firearm to me properly and possibly placing it in an illegal spot.

    So, guys, can you help me? I need some help writing the complaints and know who to send them to. I'm not sure the proper procedure. Plus, I only know one of the officers' names and the other one I don't know. I'm a bit worried, though my Dad was with me the whole time as a witness, I think they might lie in their report, like saying my firearm was loaded, or saying I concealed it.

  2. #2
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter bigtoe416's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,748

    Post imported post

    Wow. First things first, cops need reasonable and articulable suspicion to detain you, they need probable cause to arrest you.

    I'd start loading up on information relating to this incident. Try to get the initial call that sent the police to investigate you, get the radio traffic between the police officers and dispatch, get all reports related to the investigation.

    At the same time start with your complaints/lawsuits. You seem to have a good understanding of what rights were violated here. Unlawfully detained, illegally accessing the interior of your car without a warrant, and placing your property in an illegal location. I'm not sure if touching your voice recorder is illegal, although it seems out of line. I also don't know if taking your gun without your permission is illegal since 12031(e) gives them permission to do so if they are merely checking to see if it is loaded.

    It's really great that you have this all recorded and you have a witness of the entire event. I'd write down everything about this event today and then have your dad read over it and add anything you may have missed. Then review it tomorrow when you have a chance to cool down and process everything.

    Also, depending on how you're deciding to go about this, I'd talk to a lawyer about your legal options so this doesn't happen again.

    Sorry to hear you were harassed. I don't get the whole "why do you need a gun" question. It's like asking why you need a shirt or shoes or sunglasses. It's rather ridiculous.

  3. #3
    State Pioneer ConditionThree's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Shasta County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,231

    Post imported post

    Prepare yourself for some constructive criticism;

    First, if you are carrying your firearm in public, I believe it to be good policy to have your recorder constantly running. This will eliminate a need to activate it and reduced the likelyhood that anyone else will be touching it. This means having a recorder with the capacity to record serval hours of audio and having newly recharged or new batteries powering the unit.

    Second, you do not indicate that you had friendly witnesses with you or nearby. Even with a running audio recorder, the absence of witnesses makes it difficult to futher corroborate your story. Audio only records sounds- not actions, demeanor, candor, or attitude. the police in this respect could describe your behavior as advesarial or threatening without disputing what an audio recording has captured.

    Your account does not indicate that you declined to give the officers consent to search and therefore sounds as if the officers acted on implied consent in relieving you of your property. Your account does not indicate whether the officers demanded to inspect your weapon per a 12031 (e) check or how long after the (e) check was done that you were detained. It sounds to me that the contact was completely consensual, and this will likely be the police position on the way they conducted themselves.

    They can tell you that carrying a firearm is unusual and 'disturbing'. They can tell you that this alarms people and shouldnt be done becauseit scareschildren. They can be sarcastic and they can lie to you. They can even waste your time if you volunteer to cooperate.

    The biggest problem I see from your story, is that the police did conceal your firearm in your car if they placed it in a location where it could not be readily observed. Before you draft your complaint, you will need to PRA everything pertinent to your detention. Dont just write an angry letter telling them how you feel your rights were violated- back it up with some facts.


    New to OPEN CARRY in California? Click and read this first...

    NA MALE SUBJ ON FOOT, LS NB 3 AGO HAD A HOLSTERED HANDGUN ON HIS RIGHT HIP. WAS NOT BRANDISHING THE WEAPON, BUT RP FOUND SUSPICIOUS.
    CL SUBJ IN COMPLIANCE WITH LAW


    Support the 2A in California - Shop Amazon for any item and up to 15% of all purchases go back to the Calguns Foundation. Enter through either of the following links
    www.calgunsfoundation.org/amazon
    www.shop42a.com

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Galt, CA, ,
    Posts
    13

    Post imported post

    Thank you guys for your posts.

    ConditionThree, I will reply with the best of my knowledge.

    #1 I agree on recording and I shall in the future.

    #2 My father was a witness to the whole thing.

    #3 He told me I was being detained, but he could not articulate a reasonable suspicion to me. My "detention" was not over until he returned my firearm and left, I believe.

    #4 He removed my firearm himself from my holster while my hands were in the air and did not ask me permission. But in the future I will remember to mention explicitly that I do not consent to this: contact, seizure, search, privacy violation, etc.

    #5 I hope they are not trying to entrap me. He acted too quicky for me to protest and did not mention where he was putting it (especially because I couldn't perfectly catch what he was saying). Let me clearly state, he placed the firearm between the passenger door and the seat, on the floor of the cab, abouthalfway under the seat.

    # 6 What does PRA mean?

    Next time I will rememeber to constantly tell them I do not consent to anything and that I want to be left alone.



  5. #5
    State Pioneer ConditionThree's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Shasta County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,231

    Post imported post

    PRA refers to the California Public Records Act. It is our state version of the federal Freedom of Information Act and works basically the same way. You should be able to request certain records of your detention as well as any documentation of the event such as 911 and radio traffic audio tapes, field interview notes, reports and email written up by the police about the contact you had.

    I would expect the policeto refer to 12031 (e) as their probable cause to detain you. They will indicate that because you were armed was sufficient suspicion that you violated 12031, upon inspecting your firearm, they released you absent a violation. (Which is like pulling over a car for suspicion of not having insurance or required safety equipment.)
    New to OPEN CARRY in California? Click and read this first...

    NA MALE SUBJ ON FOOT, LS NB 3 AGO HAD A HOLSTERED HANDGUN ON HIS RIGHT HIP. WAS NOT BRANDISHING THE WEAPON, BUT RP FOUND SUSPICIOUS.
    CL SUBJ IN COMPLIANCE WITH LAW


    Support the 2A in California - Shop Amazon for any item and up to 15% of all purchases go back to the Calguns Foundation. Enter through either of the following links
    www.calgunsfoundation.org/amazon
    www.shop42a.com

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    , California, USA
    Posts
    560

    Post imported post

    I'm not sure a complaint is your best course of action. Sounds more like a civil rights violation, and a consulting with a lawyer might be a better route.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    38

    Post imported post

    NightOwl wrote:
    I'm not sure a complaint is your best course of action. Sounds more like a civil rights violation, and a consulting with a lawyer might be a better route.
    Yep.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Brighton, CO
    Posts
    16

    Post imported post

    Sorry to hear your civil rights were violated in such a manner Dessun! Although it isn't surprising.

    This was in Galt? If so I'd try contacting the police chief first, a well written letter will at least inform the department that you're angry so there's likely to be some mention of it since I doubt they want a lawsuit.

  9. #9
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    Dessun wrote:
    Yeah,I was out waxing my car in front of my houseon the morning ofApril 19th (I was on the street, too bad I didn't do it in the driveway, that would have been even better). I was UOC, as I sometimes do.
    I'm curious. What was your rationale for waxing the car on the street rather than on your driveway?

    Driveway full?



  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    The Left Coast, , USA
    Posts
    228

    Post imported post

    I made some notes in the body of your post.

    Dessun wrote:
    Yeah,┬*I was out waxing my car in front of my house┬*on the morning of┬*April 19th (I was on the street, too bad I didn't do it in the driveway, that would have been even better). I was UOC, as I sometimes do. Sure enough,┬*a cop decided to stop by.┬* He took my gun---(how did he take it from you? unless he threw you on the ground or twisted your arm you are going to have a hard time making this into an issue) and I pressed record on my voice recorder and set it on my car. Another cop pulled up. They gave me the "why do you need a gun to wax your car" line. They didn't like I was recording the encounter (saying it was illegal) and one cop picked up my recorder and set it back down and it slid off the car into the ground. ---(This you can actually make a legit issue out of. Is your property damaged? If yes make a monetary claim. Quote any appropriate code or case law that says recording not a crime)┬*He said, "Oops" sarcastically. (I asked him why he knocked off my recorder. And he said it slid off the car because of my wax job.) I asked if I was being detained, and one cop said "yes". I asked what I was being detained for and they said "cause you're waxing your car with a gun". I said "that isn't against the law, can you specifically tell me which law you believe I have broken?" They couldn't, but kept saying how you never see something like this and it disturbs the people in the neighborhood. ---(Not much in the way of a workable issue here but you can write it up to show bad attitude on their part. Don't bother crying rights violation. It won't get you anywhere at this level.)

    One cop┬*kept saying I had a loaded┬*gun,┬*because I had ammo with me on my belt (clearly he misunderstands the law). They also said I might be breaking a city ordinance (I'm not I checked). One cop was saying that my shirt partial conceals my handgun, but it does not in the slightest. I was sure to wear a carefully selected shirt. They┬*called in the situation, but┬*couldn't find any reason to┬*arrest me.┬*They said the DA will get back to me if they find anything. ---(Argue the law here. Include a copy of the open carry flier and include some quotes in your letter)

    The cop wouldn't hand me my firearm ---(non issue), instead he went to the passenger side of the car I was waxing, opened the door, and set the gun between the passenger seat and the door ---(not a search, no 4th violation), half-way under the seat,┬*saying it was for his protection and I could get it after he left ---(semi-legitimate complaint but you can always argue that you didn't threaten before he had your gun so why are you a threat after he's done with it). Then he left. Well, he placed that gun IMO in a concealed spot, which┬*is┬*illegal, possibly entrapping me. I'm not saying they were trying to set me up, but that is poor judgement for an officer of the law. ---(spurious argument, know your definitions. Entrapment is not what you think it is.) returned the gun to my holster.

    A total of four police cars came by ---(and?), but only two officers delt with me. I will be filing complaints with several people┬*for this police misconduct. For one, detaining me without reasonable suspicion of a crime (fixed, thanks bigtoe). Another for touching my voice recorder and causing it to fall.---(again touching it means nothing. dropping it might be a workable beef. Did they turn it off? If so you can scream that they were trying to conceal their bad acts by doing so. There are lots of departments that record so you can use that to your benefit) Another for taking my firearm without consent ---(your failure to surrender your piece is probable cause to arrest. don't try to make that an issue) to run a background ---(know your definitions) check. Another for accessing my car without permission---(no search no violation), and for not returning my firearm to me properly ---(rude but not illegal) and possibly placing it in an illegal spot---(non-argument).

    So, guys, can you help me? I need some help writing the complaints and know who to send them to. I'm not sure the proper procedure. Plus, I only know one of the officers' names and the other one I don't know. I'm a bit worried, though my Dad was with me the whole time as a witness, I think they might lie in their report ---(what report? Log item only most likely), like saying my firearm was loaded, or saying I concealed it.
    If you beef the cops address your concerns to the Galt Chief of Police. do you really have the cash and time to support a law suit? My guess is no. Ask for an apology and training for the cops and see where that gets you.

    I posted this a few days ago in the General discussion forum. Use it as you see fit.

    I was just in the California forum and saw that one of the members there is in a tussle with the San Diego Sheriff over a CCW application. He posted a letter that he submitted to them to complain about how he was being treated. His letter got me thinking about how most folks haven't the foggiest clue about how to write a gripe to the cops. I've written plenty of police reports and read my share of complaint letters and I can tell you that there are certain things that will get your beef letter shared around the office for a good chuckle real fast.

    -Thing one. Let your emotions bleed onto the page. Do this and you sound like either a whiner or a wing nut.

    -Thing two. Write with a bigger vocabulary than you really have. Keep it simple, keep it clear, don't use words you don't normally use.

    -Thing three. Tell the cops you know your rights and how they should do their jobs. I don't like it when folks tell me how to flip burgers and cops don't like being told how to cop.

    -Thing four. Ramble. Cops don't like to spend countless hours trying to make sense out of some disjointed, convoluted thing.

    The best report writing advise I ever got was, "write it for your mom." Tell a neat, orderly story in chronological order, in the first person and save your citations, opinions, beliefs and analysis for the end. If you are a lawyer or a doctor, for Dog's sake, don't write like a doctor or a lawyer. Write like a person.

    Try it this way-

    (first of how ever many paragraphs it takes to say what happened)
    On such and such a time I was at such and such a place and I did this, that and the other. I met so and so and they did this that and the other. I said this. They said that.

    (paragraph on what you think went wrong)
    This is how so and so's behavior affected me. These are the rules as I understand them (briefly). This is how I think that their behavior violated the rules.

    (paragraph with supporting citations, etc.)
    Rule such and such says this. The law say that. The judges have said that the rules and law mean this.

    (Paragraph about what's next)
    This is what I have done so far. This is what I plan on doing next.

    (Paragraph on what you want them to do for you)
    Now I'm giving you a list of things you can do to make me happy. Give me my permit. Give me back my money. Be nice to small children and dogs. What ever tickles your fancy.

    Thank you for your time. I expect to hear from you in the soonly.

    Thanks,

    signed, Me (the dude with the beef)
    Here's how you can get in touch with me.

    I never liked getting beefed and I don't like the idea of beefing cops in general, but sometimes they deserve it. So if you've got to beef a cop at least have the decency to do it well. Keep it clear, keep it straightforward, keep it civil.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Galt, CA, ,
    Posts
    13

    Post imported post

    I'm curious. What was your rationale for waxing the car on the street rather than on your driveway?

    Driveway full?

    I moved it to the street to wash the day before so I wouldn't overspray my Dad's car next to mine. I found out my car had a leak in the tire so I left it there overnight. Then my Dad was washing his car the next day, so I didn't want to move it back till he was done. But I guess it would have been to more benefit had I moved it back to wax it, considering it is my private property. Though in terms of UOC, it is irrelevant, as no law was broken by being on the street.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Galt, CA, ,
    Posts
    13

    Post imported post

    Nice post grumpycoconut. I didn't even see you edited my post with comments until the second time I read it. You touched on a lot. I realize some of my complaints weren't against the law specifically, and thats how the LEOs get away with it. As of right now, I don't believe a lawsuit would do much good (lawyers are rather expensive). But I definetly want to complain about the conduct of the officers and about their lack of training for open carry. One cop even said that he had never heard of anything like this before.

    I'm taking a Criminal Justice classand it has a chapter on report writing of a style for what you are suggesting. Maybe it will be of some use. I will have to read it again. It sounds like you are either a LEO or have a criminal justice degree perhaps?

    ---(what report? Log item only most likely)


    I was referring to when they said the DA would look into it. I assumed they would write a report for him/her, but I don't really know the policy.



    ---(spurious argument, know your definitions. Entrapment is not what you think it is.

    INAL, but I understood entrapment to basically mean "creating a crime where there would otherwise not have been one". That could be through coercion or force.

  13. #13
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter bigtoe416's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,748

    Post imported post

    GrumpCoconut: You said that when the police officer opened Dessun's car door and placed the handgun inside that it wasn't a search and therefore legal. While it may not be a "search" per se, I find it rather worrisome that this sort of thing would be legal.

    In this situation the car itself plays no role in the story. Dessun isn't in the car, Dessun isn't driving the car, the car very well could have been his Dad's car or a friend's car. If the officer opened the car door and found a bag of drugs would the it be admissible as evidence for a drug crime? I would believe the answer would be no since the officer had no right opening that door to begin with.

    I'd love to read any case law citations that prove your point though.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    396

    Post imported post

    Yet they still pretend to be shocked that we despise them.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    The Left Coast, , USA
    Posts
    228

    Post imported post

    bigtoe416 wrote:
    GrumpCoconut: You said that when the police officer opened Dessun's car door and placed the handgun inside that it wasn't a search and therefore legal. While it may not be a "search" per se, I find it rather worrisome that this sort of thing would be legal.

    In this situation the car itself plays no role in the story. Dessun isn't in the car, Dessun isn't driving the car, the car very well could have been his Dad's car or a friend's car. If the officer opened the car door and found a bag of drugs would the it be admissible as evidence for a drug crime? I would believe the answer would be no since the officer had no right opening that door to begin with.

    I'd love to read any case law citations that prove your point though.
    I didn't say that it was "legal" I said that there was no 4th amendment Search and Seizure violation. I can't think of any specific penal code they violated by opening the car and putting property in to it. As for your hypothetical I'm guessing that if a smart cop could wrote good enough paper a ballsy DA might be ok with filing it. Of course most DAs are wimps. I have my doubts that a judge would let it fly though. Plain view might be a bit of a stretch since a good defense attorney might be able to dig up an argument on how the cop was not somewhere he was legally permitted to be when he made his discovery. Just not sure what law he would trot out to support his argument. It would be fun to see how it shook out.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    The Left Coast, , USA
    Posts
    228

    Post imported post

    old dog wrote:
    Yet they still pretend to be shocked that we despise them.
    Only in public. In private they just don't care what you think.:P

    Don't like it? Do something about it.

  17. #17
    Founder's Club Member MudCamper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Sebastopol, California, USA
    Posts
    710

    Post imported post

    I think it is very important for everyone who OCs to carry at least one of the LEA memos with them, so that you can hand it to LEOs who are totally ignorant of the law.

    At the very least, carry this one with you: http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/car...t-12042008.pdf

    or one of the others from a LEA in your area.



  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Galt, CA, ,
    Posts
    13

    Post imported post

    MudCamper wrote:
    I think it is very important for everyone who OCs to carry at least one of the LEA memos with them, so that you can hand it to LEOs who are totally ignorant of the law.

    At the very least, carry this one with you: http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/car...t-12042008.pdf

    or one of the others from a LEA in your area.

    Yeah, I had that one and another one. He didn't want to see them, said memos don't mean jack.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Antelope, California, USA
    Posts
    96

    Post imported post

    Dessun - Sorry to hear about all that. We seemed to be coming into a time when it appeared that most LEO's in Cali have at least heard of OC by now. Looks like Galt is behind the curve a little. I wonder if it wouldn't be prudent to send a copy of one of the Sac memos to the Chief or training officer for teh department.

    That, at least, might prompt some type of briefing. Hope this doesn't affect your decision to continue UOC or not.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Coupeville, WA
    Posts
    278

    Post imported post

    Dessun - sucks to read about this. It wasn't often I heard of this kind of stuff while I was in WA, but hey...that state is friendly towards its citizens.

    Grumpycoconut - That draft looks pretty good. I'll have to remember that format if/when I need to complain.

  21. #21
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter bigtoe416's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,748

    Post imported post

    grumpycoconut wrote:
    I didn't say that it was "legal" I said that there was no 4th amendment Search and Seizure violation. I can't think of any specific penal code they violated by opening the car and putting property in to it.
    Fair enough, neither can I. I can definitely see where your viewpoint is here, and I definitely respect the definitely lawful versus unlawful viewpoint you take. In your profession you have reason to do so.

    As for your hypothetical I'm guessing that if a smart cop could wrote good enough paper a ballsy DA might be ok with filing it. Of course most DAs are wimps. I have my doubts that a judge would let it fly though. Plain view might be a bit of a stretch since a good defense attorney might be able to dig up an argument on how the cop was not somewhere he was legally permitted to be when he made his discovery. Just not sure what law he would trot out to support his argument. It would be fun to see how it shook out.
    Here is where I can trot out the opinion of Arizona v. Hicks. In Hicks the officer merely lifted up the stereo (or looked around back of the stereo) to record the serial number and the Supreme Court ruled that to be a search.

    In this case, by opening Dessun's car door, the police officer was conducting a search. I'm basing this on the language in Hicks where the judges note that by lifting or looking behind the stereo the officers could have found something. It could have been a love note, it could have been drugs, it could have been anything, but by doing so a search was indeed performed.

    The officer's in Dessun's case go beyond Hicks, because the officers aren't merely looking behind or underneath an object out in the open, but they are opening a car door where they have no reason to do so. The fact that Dessun wasn't in his car, that no part of his story takes place in his car up until the point which the officer opens the car door makes this an unlawful search in my opinion, and hence unconstitutional.

  22. #22
    Founder's Club Member MudCamper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Sebastopol, California, USA
    Posts
    710

    Post imported post

    Dessun wrote:
    MudCamper wrote:
    I think it is very important for everyone who OCs to carry at least one of the LEA memos with them, so that you can hand it to LEOs who are totally ignorant of the law.

    At the very least, carry this one with you: http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/car...t-12042008.pdf

    or one of the others from a LEA in your area.

    Yeah, I had that one and another one. He didn't want to see them, said memos don't mean jack.
    Wow. Do you have a recording of this?


  23. #23
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Stanislaus County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,586

    Post imported post

    I don't know how long you were detained, but it sounds like it was longer than an "e" check takes. In this case, I don't think I would bother with a civil suit, as you don't have much in the way of 'damages.' Just not sure it would be worth the time/money you would have to put into the case.

    You can call the department and ask what the process is for filing a complaint against an officer. They will have procedures in place to take care of something like that. This would ensure the problem is handled and documented... just in case it happens again.

    Beyond a formal complaint, you could write a letter to the chief asking that officers be made aware that 4th Amendment violations are a liability to themselves and the department. Especially in light of the Nordyke decision, it is going to get very expensive to do things like this in the very near future. As tax-paying citizens, it is important we help our departments keep their liabilities to a minimum.
    Participant in the Free State Project - "Liberty in Our Lifetime" - www.freestateproject.org
    Supporter of the CalGuns Foundation - http://www.calgunsfoundation.org/
    Supporter of the Madison Society - www.madison-society.org


    Don't Tread On Me.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    The Left Coast, , USA
    Posts
    228

    Post imported post

    bigtoe416 wrote:
    grumpycoconut wrote:
    I didn't say that it was "legal" I said that there was no 4th amendment Search and Seizure violation. I can't think of any specific penal code they violated by opening the car and putting property in to it.
    Fair enough, neither can I. I can definitely see where your viewpoint is here, and I definitely respect the definitely lawful versus unlawful viewpoint you take. In your profession you have reason to do so.

    As for your hypothetical I'm guessing that if a smart cop could wrote good enough paper a ballsy DA might be ok with filing it. Of course most DAs are wimps. I have my doubts that a judge would let it fly though. Plain view might be a bit of a stretch since a good defense attorney might be able to dig up an argument on how the cop was not somewhere he was legally permitted to be when he made his discovery. Just not sure what law he would trot out to support his argument. It would be fun to see how it shook out.
    Here is where I can trot out the opinion of Arizona v. Hicks. In Hicks the officer merely lifted up the stereo (or looked around back of the stereo) to record the serial number and the Supreme Court ruled that to be a search.

    In this case, by opening Dessun's car door, the police officer was conducting a search. I'm basing this on the language in Hicks where the judges note that by lifting or looking behind the stereo the officers could have found something. It could have been a love note, it could have been drugs, it could have been anything, but by doing so a search was indeed performed.

    The officer's in Dessun's case go beyond Hicks, because the officers aren't merely looking behind or underneath an object out in the open, but they are opening a car door where they have no reason to do so. The fact that Dessun wasn't in his car, that no part of his story takes place in his car up until the point which the officer opens the car door makes this an unlawful search in my opinion, and hence unconstitutional.
    Toe,

    Lawful v. Unlawful is the only perspective that counts here (at least until the revolution comes). It has nothing to do with profession. It has everything to do with being in a position where the "Law" might have a direct impact on you.

    I can argue my way around Hicks here just based on the specifics of the two cases. You said that in Hicks the cop lifted a stereo in order look for a serial number. This is a clear and unequivocal direct effort to seek informationthat was not otherwise visible and might adverselyeffect the defendant should the number show that the stereo was hot. In the extant case, Dessun v Galt, The officer took what is arguably a dangerous implement and, in the interest of public safety, sought out a secure location in which to temporarily and safely store it. That Dessun was never in hiscar and that the car was never central in any way to the circumstances of the contactgives additional weight tothe officer's claim that he entered Dessun's car with only the intent to safeguard the gun and supports the state's contention that the discovery of Dessun's dirty magazines, smelly socks and other illicit unmentionables was inadvertantand falls under the plain sight exception.

    This Court of Kangaroos holdsthat the aforementioned unmentionables are admissible into evidence. Bailiff, beat the deffendant.

    I, The Dishonorable Grumpycoconut, Magistrate of the InterwebzCourt of Kangaroos, haz spoken. Bow before my wisdom.

    Next case, Citizen v.LEO229. Now lets go out there and give these guilty bastards a fair trial.

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Galt, CA, ,
    Posts
    13

    Post imported post

    MudCamper wrote:
    Wow. Do you have a recording of this?
    Yes, minus the first 20 seconds of contact. The quality isn't perfect because of their squad car engines constantly rumbling. I'm getting a digital cam and having someone tape it next time.



    CA_Libertarian wrote:
    I don't know how long you were detained, but it sounds like it was longer than an "e" check takes. In this case, I don't think I would bother with a civil suit, as you don't have much in the way of 'damages.' Just not sure it would be worth the time/money you would have to put into the case.

    You can call the department and ask what the process is for filing a complaint against an officer. They will have procedures in place to take care of something like that. This would ensure the problem is handled and documented... just in case it happens again.

    Beyond a formal complaint, you could write a letter to the chief asking that officers be made aware that 4th Amendment violations are a liability to themselves and the department. Especially in light of the Nordyke decision, it is going to get very expensive to do things like this in the very near future. As tax-paying citizens, it is important we help our departments keep their liabilities to a minimum.
    Thanks, my thoughts exactly. I'm concerned that the dept. hasn't trained their officers to respond to UOC firearm possession.

    I'm particularly concerned by the conduct of the one officer who told me I couldn't record the police and who touched my Digital Voice Recorder and caused it to slide off my car. His sarcastic "Oops" and blaming it on my wax job was plainly obvious.Though I doubtit would be provable in a court that he did it on purpose (despitehaving a witness).

    Regardless if it was illegal or not, I don't approve of the officer's actions who placed my firearm in my car. At first he set it on my trunk, but picked it back up. Despite the legalese of what grumpycoconut says, the firearm was not loaded and theofficerhas nothing to be afraid of from a law-abiding citizen. And I did nothing that should lead him to believe otherwise.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •