Georgia Firearm Forums - Georgia Packing banner
1 - 20 of 25 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,117 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I saw this on FourthAmendment.com here: http://fourthamendment.com/blog/index.p ... &tb=1&pb=1
Here, the justification for the search was the consent exception to the warrant requirement. But, as in V.H. v. State, 903 So. 2d 321 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005), the officer’s testimony at J.W.E.’s suppression hearing did not unequivocally establish that J.W.E. consented to the warrantless search. Indeed, the officer’s testimony that J.W.E. answered “yes†when asked “Do you mind if I search you,†tended to establish that J.W.E. did not consent. Because the evidence did not unequivocally establish J.W.E.'s consent, the motion to suppress should have been granted.
This occurred in Florida. Click the url for the link to the opinion.

Be very careful how you answer a question.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,624 Posts
Perhaps it is better to answer no questions and only give statements... statements like, "I do not consent to any searches of my person or my property."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,809 Posts
It sounds like consent was irrelevant as the officer had PC. However, I don't get most of the justifications for the PC:
We need not reach the issue of consent because the officer had probable cause to search Flores's vehicle because of: (1) Flores's nervousness, which manifested itself in various ways; (2) the fact that Flores came from Laredo, which the officer knew to be a major source city for narcotics; (3) the smell of axle grease, which the officer knew to be a cover odor for narcotics; (4) Flores's contradictory answers regarding his trip; (5) Flores's contradictory answers regarding the fingerprints on the car's trunk; (6) Flores's evasive answers regarding whether the car contained illegal substances; and (7) Flores-Manjarez's evasive actions prior to the traffic stop.
1) Who isn't nervous during a LEO encounter?
2) If there is crime in your city you're guilty of a crime?
3) Cars have axel grease because they have axels.
4) Contradictory answers could be caused by said nervousness.
5) Ditto
6) ok - probably not good to be clear about if your vehicle contains illegal substances
7) ok - probably not a good thing to do either
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,117 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Nervousness? Forida v. Royer addresses being nervous.
In this case, the officers decided to approach Royer because he was carrying American Tourister luggage, which appeared to be heavy; he was young; he was casually dressed; he appeared to be pale and nervous and was looking around at other people; he paid for his airline ticket in cash with a large number of bills; and he did not completely fill out the identification tags for his luggage, which was checked to New York. See ante, at 493, n. 2. These facts clearly are not sufficient to provide the reasonable suspicion of criminal activity necessary to justify the officers' subsequent seizure of Royer. Indeed, considered individually or collectively, they are perfectly consistent with innocent behavior and cannot possibly give rise to any inference supporting a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity. The officers' seizure of Royer, therefore, was illegal.
 

·
Seasteading Aficionado
Joined
·
44,914 Posts
I can't remember an encounter that I had with the police when I wasn't nervous, and that includes when I had no idea what I had done wrong.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,809 Posts
Malum Prohibitum said:
RedDawnTheMusical said:
Cars have axel grease because they have axels.
Does your car smell of axle grease? :lol:
Look, it's a Chevy product, what do you expect? :lol:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,005 Posts
I would submit that a question asked in a manner to be confusing is meant to elicit an affirmative response that can be taken as consent. ALWAYS make your anwser non-ambivalent and a positive refusal that cannot be 'misconstrued' by the Officer.
 

·
Lawyer and Gun Activist
Joined
·
28,691 Posts
COP: "you don't mind if I don't not search your vehicle do you not?"
CITIZEN: "sure."
QUESTION: Who just agreed to what?

CONCLUSION: It's better to make short simple statements than to answer possibly confusing questions.
And make your statements loud enough for the microphone to pick up, but not in an angry tone, and not so loud as to be interpreted as hostile.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,005 Posts
gunsmoker said:
COP: "you don't mind if I don't not search your vehicle do you not?"
....
"There are no illegal weapons or drugs in my car. I do not consent to any search."
 

·
I'm kind of a big deal
Joined
·
5,243 Posts
Ok, so I have been wondering about this and I guess this as good a thread as any other for it.

So I say "I don't consent to any searches...."

What is the next step? Obviously, no one here can predict what every LEO will do but, seriously. Has anyone had this experience? What happened?

Just curious what y'all think. I know most LEO's don't like it when people don't do what they tell them.

Also, I guess that's a good time to ask AIBD? And, again, what is the next step?

If the LEO says no then I guess it's AIFTG and off you go....unless....he says yes you are being detained. Then what? I guess you ask why? Does the LEO have to tell you why you are being detained? What if you think it's a BS reason? But you are still being detained at that point. Since I am under no legal obligation to show my GWL and I won't consent to a search and I am not free to go......I don't know it just seems like it could go around in circles for awhile....

I don't know if any of this makes any sense. I think about what I will / would do in certain situations and I just wonder how it plays out when someone does stand up for their rights.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
7,204 Posts
budder said:
Match10 said:
gunsmoker said:
COP: "you don't mind if I don't not search your vehicle do you not?"
....
"There are no illegal weapons or drugs in my car. I do not consent to any search."
Why say the first sentence? I don't see how that could possibly help.
Exactly Budder. Last time I was pulled over, I got a similar weirdly phrased request for search after normally phrased requests for a search didn't work, I started to fall for it, but stopped when the deputy's eyes started bugging out like he'd just won, then I stopped what I was saying and said "I do not consent to a search of this vehicle."

My continuous refusals to search my vehicle paid off, I was free to go without any warning or citation for the reason I was pulled over. Unless asked about contraband, i'm not interjecting it into the conversation.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,624 Posts
BSCLibertarian said:
Ok, so I have been wondering about this and I guess this as good a thread as any other for it.

So I say "I don't consent to any searches...."

What is the next step? Obviously, no one here can predict what every LEO will do but, seriously. Has anyone had this experience? What happened?

Just curious what y'all think. I know most LEO's don't like it when people don't do what they tell them.

Also, I guess that's a good time to ask AIBD? And, again, what is the next step?

If the LEO says no then I guess it's AIFTG and off you go....unless....he says yes you are being detained. Then what? I guess you ask why? Does the LEO have to tell you why you are being detained? What if you think it's a BS reason? But you are still being detained at that point. Since I am under no legal obligation to show my GWL and I won't consent to a search and I am not free to go......I don't know it just seems like it could go around in circles for awhile....

I don't know if any of this makes any sense. I think about what I will / would do in certain situations and I just wonder how it plays out when someone does stand up for their rights.
If they have PC then they are not going to ask you. After you tell them you do not consent, then barring any other legitimate activity like ticket writing, simply ask AIFTG. It does no good to ask if you are being detained. If you are free to go, then go. If not, then you can assume you are being detained. Remaining silent is key here.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
7,204 Posts
BSCLibertarian said:
Ok, so I have been wondering about this and I guess this as good a thread as any other for it.

So I say "I don't consent to any searches...."

What is the next step? Obviously, no one here can predict what every LEO will do but, seriously. Has anyone had this experience? What happened? I mentioned a bit of my experience in this thread, but there's another thread around where I went into detail with Legacy. I think the LEO that pulled me over caught his attention since he was an Oconee County Sheriffs Deputy, in South Carolina.

Just curious what y'all think. I know most LEO's don't like it when people don't do what they tell them. No, he didn't like it. After 3 request to search, he went back to his vehicle to handle the reason for the stop. On his way back to the vehicle he asked "if you have nothing to hide"... I replied, "I know my rights".

Also, I guess that's a good time to ask AIBD? And, again, what is the next step? You are being detained until the purpose of the stop is completed.

If the LEO says no then I guess it's AIFTG and off you go....unless....he says yes you are being detained. Then what? I guess you ask why? Does the LEO have to tell you why you are being detained? What if you think it's a BS reason? But you are still being detained at that point. Since I am under no legal obligation to show my GWL and I won't consent to a search and I am not free to go......I don't know it just seems like it could go around in circles for awhile.... I didn't make it to that point, so i'm of no help.

I don't know if any of this makes any sense. I think about what I will / would do in certain situations and I just wonder how it plays out when someone does stand up for their rights. I walked. Stand your ground. Don't answer his questions as he phrases it, just say "I do not consent to a search" and stick to it.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,624 Posts
JiG said:
Unless asked about contraband, i'm not interjecting it into the conversation.
Even if you are asked about drugs, missiles, or Cuban cigars, you'd be wise to say nothing at all. Either they are detaining you or they are not. If they're asking, they don't have PC to search and are hoping you talk too much.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
7,204 Posts
AV8R said:
JiG said:
Unless asked about contraband, i'm not interjecting it into the conversation.
Even if you are asked about drugs, missiles, or Cuban cigars, you'd be wise to say nothing at all. Either they are detaining you or they are not. If they're asking, they don't have PC to search and are hoping you talk too much.
You're right.
 

·
I'm kind of a big deal
Joined
·
5,243 Posts
Thanks - those answers help. They sort of reinforce what I was thinking.

I guess the biggest thing is to not back down and know that you are right. Just for the record I do respect LEO's and I think most people here do.....but I know they are not all perfect.

We talk a lot about the 2nd on here but maybe not enough about the 4th....
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 Warrants 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.
and the 5th (emphasis mine)
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,005 Posts
budder said:
Match10 said:
gunsmoker said:
COP: "you don't mind if I don't not search your vehicle do you not?"
....
"There are no illegal weapons or drugs in my car. I do not consent to any search."
Why say the first sentence? I don't see how that could possibly help.
Of course, virtually every time I have been asked to search the vehicle, the first questions if I had any drugs or weapons in the car. I leave that out on the odd chance they do not ask that first, though it rarely occurs. It is a standard, rehearsed answer to many possible combinations I have been personally asked on the side of the road in 37 years of driving. NO SCREWUPS!
 
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
Top