Not consenting

[cohhbra]

So when officers pull someone over and feel the need to search the car, most people comply because they don't know they can say no or think they'll get in more trouble. But...I was wondering if any officers still do it anyway even if the person says no or if it makes officers mad when someone doesn't consent?

I'm just asking because this happened to one of my friends while I was in the car and the officer got very mad and made us put our hands on the ceiling and did a sobriety test on my friend but never got to search the car.

 

[ModularFan]

An Officer doesnt need consent, as long as he has reasonable suspison of smelling alcohol or any type of drugs. or the driver seems fishy about something, like eyes being red, shaky etc.

 

[txyaloo]

An Officer doesnt need consent, as long as he has reasonable suspison of smelling alcohol or any type of drugs. or the driver seems fishy about something, like eyes being red, shaky etc.

An officer needs probable cause to perform a search. Reasonable suspicion is what is needed to initiate a stop. Two different standards. Reasonable suspicion is not enough for a search of a vehicle or person.

This topic has been covered quite a bit on here, and IIRC, there's actually a sticky above that explains your rights when stopped.

 

[ModularFan]

An officer needs probable cause to perform a search. Reasonable suspicion is what is needed to initiate a stop. Two different standards. Reasonable suspicion is not enough for a search of a vehicle or person.

This topic has been covered quite a bit on here, and IIRC, there's actually a sticky above that explains your rights when stopped.

Iam probably gonna get an infraction or banned but whatever. I just said that, Obviously the officer has reasonable cause to pull them over in the first place, speeding, swerving etc.

As he approached the vehicle it is not known if the officer smelled alcohol or any other substance that gave him reasonable cause to search the vehicle and perform a soberity test. OP left those details out.

 

[cohhbra]

I know he had reasonable suspicion, I won't say why though, but what I'm asking is if any officers ever bend the rules in situations like this and search anyway or try harder to get whoever it is they pulled over in trouble.

 

[FordSVTFan]

An Officer doesnt need consent, as long as he has reasonable suspison of smelling alcohol or any type of drugs. or the driver seems fishy about something, like eyes being red, shaky etc.

The officer needs consent, a warrant, or a warrant exception to search. Reasonable suspicion is not a warrant exception. You really do not understand this topic.

An officer needs probable cause to perform a search. Reasonable suspicion is what is needed to initiate a stop. Two different standards. Reasonable suspicion is not enough for a search of a vehicle or person.

This topic has been covered quite a bit on here, and IIRC, there's actually a sticky above that explains your rights when stopped.

^^THIS^^

Iam probably gonna get an infraction or banned but whatever. I just said that, Obviously the officer has reasonable cause to pull them over in the first place, speeding, swerving etc.

Speeding or Swerving are both infractions and thus are probable cause. You are confusing two different standards.

 

[silver03svt]

And if the officer had reasonable suspicion, and you won't say why though, then how do you expect us to give you an answer based upon your experience? If you are wanting LEO's to give their opinions on a situation, or ask how they would have handled it, then us as the LEO's need to know all the 411 about the stop.

 

[Iman01]

If you give consent then anything and everything the officer finds can be used against you. If you do not give consent the officer will need probable cause. You can expect the officer to interact with you longer to attempt to find probable cause.

If you do not agree with the probable cause found, it may not prevent your car from getting searched. The side of the road is not the place to force that issue, but your lawyer can fight that in court and what is found might be thrown out. There are also guidelines to how long the officer can keep you on the side of the road. Again, pointing this out to the officer while you are stopped is not generally fruitful. But if the officer is not following those laws his/her superiors will want to know.

 

[Hitman318]

I know he had reasonable suspicion, I won't say why though, but what I'm asking is if any officers ever bend the rules in situations like this and search anyway or try harder to get whoever it is they pulled over in trouble.

So basically what you are saying is there was something in the car illegal

 

[cohhbra]

I'm trying to say that when this does happen to any officers, do all of them take more precaution because in the court of law saying you don't consent is not in any way supposed to be considered suspicious I thought? I'm just asking if most officers always push the subject as hard as he did with us?

 

[silver03svt]

Again, you're not telling us WHY the officer had reasonable suspicion. An LEO is not gonna answer your question to that situation without knowing all the facts. I, as a State Trooper, am not going to armchair quarterback that officers decisions with my opinions on how he handled that stop or what I would do if I do NOT know all the facts that you're not telling us. If you want LEO's opinions based upon this incident, then WE, as LEO's, need to know ALL the facts of the situation. If you can't be honest and tell us everything about the stop, then don't ask our opinions. I'm not here to draw conclusions or make speculations on information I do not know.

 

[FordSVTFan]

Again, you're not telling us WHY the officer had reasonable suspicion. An LEO is not gonna answer your question to that situation without knowing all the facts. I, as a State Trooper, am not going to armchair quarterback that officers decisions with my opinions on how he handled that stop or what I would do if I do NOT know all the facts that you're not telling us. If you want LEO's opinions based upon this incident, then WE, as LEO's, need to know ALL the facts of the situation. If you can't be honest and tell us everything about the stop, then don't ask our opinions. I'm not here to draw conclusions or make speculations on information I do not know.

Ding, Ding, Ding, we have a winner.

^This,this, and all of this^

:beer: