Does an Empty Holster Give RAS or PC to Search Vehicle?

imported post

Does an empty holster give RAS or PC to search my vehicle?

If I am pulled over for a traffic stop, or entering/exiting a vehicle with a visible empty holster, and a cop asks to search myself or the vehicle and I refuse consent, can he use the empty holster to conduct the serch anyhow?

imported post

Does an occupied holster give them PC or RAS of a crime?

Transporting firearms is legal (with restrictions), so I'm going to say no on both.

imported post

Does holding a plastic cup while walking down a street give LEO RAS to stop you?

He doesn't know what you have in the cup!

I don't think that should give a LEO a RS of you or your vehicle, a empty holster is just an empty holster, you could use it to hold mints for all he needs to know. Just my opinion and God knows we all have one!

imported post

I diddnt think so, but never hurts to ask around. An empty holster is also a form of protest. Should be protected under the first amendment.

imported post

stainless1911 wrote:

SNIP Does an empty holster give RAS or PC to search my vehicle?

Click to expand...

RAS and PC are terms that have to do with standards of suspicion of a crime or evidence of a crime.

Your question will have more to do with officer safety.

In Terry v Ohio, the US Supreme Court basically said that before a cop could search for a weapon for officer safety, three elements had to be present: 1) reasonable suspicion the person is armed 2) reasonable suspicion the person is presently dangerous, and 3) nothing in the first few moments of the encounter serves to dispel the cop's concern for safety.

In PA vs Mimms the US Supreme Court effectively removed the last twoTerry-requirements for a traffic stop for the officer to have reason to think the person is presently dangerous and that nothing in the first few moments dispels his concern about safety.

Thus, during traffic stops, Mimmsleft only the first requirement ofTerry: reasonable suspicion of gun.

Wanta bet that an empty holster will be viewed by the courts as reasonable suspicion a gun may be present and allow the officer to search for his safety?

Also, it has been a while since I've read them, so I can't cite, but I think there are other court cases that allow cops to search the areas the driver can reach for a weapon for officer safety. Perhaps another forum member knows the cases and can refresh our collective memory.

It occurs to me that you all may have a law prohibitingcarry in a vehicle, or alaw requiring a certain kind of carry in a vehicle, or requiring a license for vehicle carry. An empty holsterwould probablygive reasonable articulable suspicion (RAS) such a law is being violated, allowing additional detention beyond the traffic stop itself, for the cop to try to determine if such a law is being broken by a plain view search or questioning.I am fairly sure an empty holster could give rise to reasonable suspicion of a gun for officer safety. Mimms all but says so. And the courts seem to give wide latitude to police on officer safety matters.I strongly suspect that a gun whichis in violationof a vehicle carry lawthat is found during an officer safety search will not be suppressed by the courts. Meaning, I strongly suspect a court would admit into evidence such a gun.

Heck, a court might even admit such a gun if it is found inside the car while the person to whom it belongs is outside the car. Remember that Gant addresses searches incident to arrest. A cop might claim the empty holster outside the car during a traffic stop is probable cause to search for a gun carried in violation of a vehicle law, and a court might side with him. I think it can depend on as little as whether the cop and judge feel it is more likely than not that somebody wearing an empty holster took the gun out for comfort or something while driving.

I wouldn't take any chances. Even if I locked the gun in the trunk, securely wrapped/cased, separate from secured ammunition, I wouldn't give a cop the opportunity to search my car based on an empty holster.Even though he didn't find anything, I'd still be out the time, and have the aggravation. I'd just put theholster and mag pouch in the trunk, too.

PA v Mimms: http://supreme.justia.com/us/434/106/case.html

Terry v Ohio: http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0392_0001_ZO.html

Other court cases that have proven helpful to know:

http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum65/23936.html

Arizona v Gant: http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/07-542.ZO.html

Edited to add text in blue.

imported post

My guess is that Citizen is correct ... it WOULD be considered sufficient to establish RAS for a Terry stop.

Think of it this way as well ... would an empty beer can or whiskey bottle establish RAS for DUI? I believe they would.

If I didn't want a LEO searching my vehicle I certainly wouldn't display an empty holster in plain view.

Your lawyer might POSSIBLY be able to argue the issue at trial, and if s(he)'s successful then whatever the LEO found MIGHT be excluded at trial ... but I sure wouldn't bet on it.

Citizen wrote:

stainless1911 wrote:

SNIP Does an empty holster give RAS or PC to search my vehicle?

Click to expand...

RAS and PC are terms that have to do with standards of suspicion of a crime or evidence of a crime.

Your question will have more to do with officer safety.

In Terry v Ohio, the US Supreme Court basically said that before a cop could search for a weapon for officer safety, three elements had to be present: 1) reasonable suspicion the person is armed 2) reasonable suspicion the person is presently dangerous, and 3) nothing in the first few moments of the encounter serves to dispel the cop's concern for safety.

In PA vs Mimms the US Supreme Court effectively removed the last twoTerry-requirements for the officer to have reason to think the person is presently dangerous and that nothing in the first few moments dispels his concern about safety.

Thus, during traffic stops, Mimmsleft with only the first requirement ofTerry: reasonable suspicion of gun.

Wanta bet that an empty holster will be viewed by the courts as reasonable suspicion a gun may be present and allow the officer to search for his safety?

Also, it has been a while since I've read them, so I can't cite, but I think there are other court cases that allow cops to search the areas the driver can reach for a weapon for officer safety. Perhaps another forum member knows the cases and can refresh our collective memory.

PA v Mimms: http://supreme.justia.com/us/434/106/case.html

Terry v Ohio: http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0392_0001_ZO.html

Other court cases that have proven helpful to know:

http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum65/23936.html

Click to expand...

imported post

stainless1911 wrote:

Does an empty holster give RAS or PC to search my vehicle?

If I am pulled over for a traffic stop, or entering/exiting a vehicle with a visible empty holster, and a cop asks to search myself or the vehicle and I refuse consent, can he use the empty holster to conduct the serch anyhow?

Click to expand...

I would agree with citizen here, based upon cites stated. I get why you are asking the question given your current circumstances...

However, if you refuse consent to search, an officer can still search unless you attempt to physically stop them somehow. I do not believe anything found after refusal could be used against you as it would be "fruit from the poisonous tree".

Other thoughts anyone?

imported post

It sounds like I should be taking off my holster and putting it in the trunk with my weapon. Thanks for starting this thread, as I hadn't thought it through obviously.

ETA: A little OT, but I want to be sure on something: The gun has to be unloaded, in the trunk, but it isn't illegal to have your magazines/ammo in the same case as the unloaded weapon?

imported post

Citizen wrote:

stainless1911 wrote:

SNIP Does an empty holster give RAS or PC to search my vehicle?

Click to expand...

RAS and PC are terms that have to do with standards of suspicion of a crime or evidence of a crime.

Your question will have more to do with officer safety.

In Terry v Ohio, the US Supreme Court basically said that before a cop could search for a weapon for officer safety, three elements had to be present: 1) reasonable suspicion the person is armed 2) reasonable suspicion the person is presently dangerous, and 3) nothing in the first few moments of the encounter serves to dispel the cop's concern for safety.

In PA vs Mimms the US Supreme Court effectively removed the last twoTerry-requirements for the officer to have reason to think the person is presently dangerous and that nothing in the first few moments dispels his concern about safety.

Thus, during traffic stops, Mimmsleft with only the first requirement ofTerry: reasonable suspicion of gun.

Wanta bet that an empty holster will be viewed by the courts as reasonable suspicion a gun may be present and allow the officer to search for his safety?

Also, it has been a while since I've read them, so I can't cite, but I think there are other court cases that allow cops to search the areas the driver can reach for a weapon for officer safety. Perhaps another forum member knows the cases and can refresh our collective memory.

PA v Mimms: http://supreme.justia.com/us/434/106/case.html

Terry v Ohio: http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0392_0001_ZO.html

Other court cases that have proven helpful to know:

http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum65/23936.html

Click to expand...

"exiting a vehicle with a visible empty holster"


If the person is outside his locked vehicle with an empty holster, the officer MIGHT have RAS to search (pat him down outside clothes), but I don't see how he can search the vehicle for a weapon as it would be secured and pose no threat to the officer's safety. It would be the same if his firearm were locked in his trunk lawfully, the weapons posses no threat to the officer in this case.

Searching a vehicle is a big intrusion into ones personal freedom and should not be looked on lightly.

imported post

Brian, would you mind scrolling up and taking a look at my edit I made to the post above yours?

imported post

fozzy71 wrote:

Brian, would you mind scrolling up and taking a look at my edit I made to the post above yours?

Click to expand...

In regards to your question about ammo. You can have your ammo in a magazine in the same case as your weapon as long as the weapon is not loaded. In fact you could wear anempty holster and a have a couple of mags on you and you would be lawful as long as the firearm was secured per state law.

The only mention of ammo separate from your firearm is if you have a CPL and you have been drinking alcohol then the weapon has to be unloaded and locked in a case, with the ammo in a separate location.

imported post

Thank you, that was my understanding but I wanted to be sure. Getting ready to head to drop off the registration for my para 1911, then to the range to put 100 rounds through it and hope the slide doesn't crack. :uhoh:

imported post

Venator wrote:

fozzy71 wrote:

Brian, would you mind scrolling up and taking a look at my edit I made to the post above yours?

Click to expand...

In regards to your question about ammo. You can have your ammo in a magazine in the same case as your weapon as long as the weapon is not loaded. In fact you could wear anempty holster and a have a couple of mags on you and you would be lawful as long as the firearm was secured per state law.

The only mention of ammo separate from your firearm is if you have a CPL and you have been drinking alcohol then the weapon has to be unloaded and locked in a case, with the ammo in a separate location.

Click to expand...

This came up in the Grand Rapids Seminar and it was amazing how many people were taught wrong by their CPL instructors.

imported post

The CPL class I took in April was a joke. The cop did a terrible job explaining the laws. He never explained the 21 ft rule or castle doctrine. he never mentioned you could OC in the PFZ's. After the '27 year veteran officer' did his part, the instructor from the shop said 'Open Carry is legal in michigan, but you cant carry in your car'. That's all we are going to say on the matter, because this is a 'concelaed pistol class'. :?

The '8 hour class' took less than 5 hours. 100 guys at $100 a piece. You do the math as to what their goals were teaching the CPL class. :uhoh:

And I am pretty sure I don't need even need to mention which shop/range this was.

imported post

To read more on this topic one should google the term "vehicle frisks".

imported post

what's the 21 foot rule? i imagine it's something to do with immediate threat or time to react.

imported post

kryptonian wrote:

what's the 21 foot rule? i imagine it's something to do with immediate threat or time to react.

Click to expand...

better known as the Tueller Drill http://defendyourself101.ca/articles/hidden-lesson-tueller-drill

imported post

if you don't have anything in your car that you wouldn't want found by a LEO during a search, it would be worth it to try the case. IMO.

imported post

I dont carry anything illegally, but I really dont want to be a 231 test case either. I also value my privacy and dont want someone digging through my car. I dont want to have to prove my intensions destinations reasons and so on for transporting, just because I have an empty drop leg, during a stop, or walking in a parking lot.

I keep getting conflicting reports on the ammo question though, even from LEO. Could someone cite wether a person can have a loaded mag in their pocket while transporting their firearm unloaded, cased, and in the trunk?

Im really tired of loading 12 rounds every time I want to OC.:banghead:

imported post

I added a few lines to my post above. A little more thinking.