EP# 661 Traffic Stops: Can You Demand Passenger Identification?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 1 июл 2024
- Case Mentioned: United States v. Landeros, No. 17-10217 (9th Cir. 2019)
Have a search and seizure question in mind?
Submit them for instructors to answer or join the next Search & Seizure show and get your questions answered LIVE ON AIR.
🚨 www.bluetogold.com/show
bluetogold.com/trainings/?att...
If you like this video, don’t forget to like and subscribe to our channel for more legal updates!
--
Blue to Gold Training:
➜ Class Schedules - www.bluetogold.com/trainings
➜ On-demand Training - university.bluetogold.com/
➜ Free Legal Training Webinar - bluetogold.com/trainings/?att...
➜ Book Store and Training Materials - www.bluetogold.com/store
CONNECT WITH US:
🌍 Facebook - / bluetogold
📸 Instagram - / bluetogold
🐦 Twitter - / bluetogold
🎥 TikTok - www.tiktok.com/bluetogoldtrai...
💌 LinkedIn - / blue. .
#searchandseizure
#caselawforcops
#leotraining
#legaleducation
#reportwriting
#LawEnforcement
#PoliceOfficers
#professionaldevelopment
#trainingexcellence
#FirstResponders
#PoliceCommunity
#CrimePrevention
#crimeFightng
#PublicSafety
#PoliceTraining
#PoliceK9
#Patrolofficer
#Trooper
#CommunityPolicing
#PoliceLife
#PoliceWork
#policenetworking
#ServeAndProtect
#PoliceFamily
#CopLife
#BackTheBlue
#BlueLivesMatter
#ThinBlueLine
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated,"
Why are you violating that which shall not be violated?
Any officer who "Demands" ID without RAS should have their drivers license info posted on the internet so that 1A and 2A activists can petition their government for redress of grievances on the public sidewalk outside said officer house.
Sounds like the caller made a few boos boos and misrepresented the status of the law. Opening himself up for lots of 1983 actions
I think the officer was calling in looking for affirmation but found out his belief in the law was incorrect. Good thing you guys are there to provide correct advice. I'm curious why you didn't say he would be stripped of qualified immunity in a civil case instead of "speak and say?"
I think in the video they pointed out that the officer would be able to get a passenger's ID if they had reasonable suspicion of a crime. If so, the reason should be articulated in the report. But if there is no suspicion of the passenger, which is probably true for most traffic stops, then the officer has no justification for demanding ID. I hope this officer mends his ways and that if he doesn't someone drops a 1983 lawsuit on him.
Police have DO have the right to order passengers out of the car, but beyond that no authority at all to demand ID or to tell them to leave the scene.
And... unexplored in all this is the eternal question..... why are police so insistent on getting ID from everyone, including those not suspected of a crime?
Actually, they don't have the RIGHT. They can only ORDER someone out if they believe they are armed and dangerous. Pennsylvania v Mimms is another case police don't bother knowing and understanding the full text of the ruling. They hear, "control occupants of a vehicle," and don't bother listening to the rest.
@@kenmartin6597 technically correct, but extremely hard to prove. In reality, police ask you to exit the car you should do so, then lock the door behind you.
As a non-LEO, never been in trouble guy, the problem I have with identifying when I don't have to is that it gets entered into "system" where if I was stopped because my car looked like one at a crime scene I am forever in the database as a robbery suspect or something.
If the officer doesn’t have “Reasonable Suspicion of a Crime” against the passenger and then unable using a lie claiming they do have to ID or they will be arrested is a violation of Federal law. Officers cannot arrest the passenger solely because they refused to ID, it is not obstruction until the officer has “Reasonable Suspicion of a Crime” and they refuse. How do officers get a badge without understanding this?
One of those rare instances where the 9th got it right!
You wouldn't get my ID.
This video talks about the 9th circuit. Can you talk about UNITED STATES v. FERNANDEZ (2010), and how this case effects officers outside of Californiastan? In this case the court appears to state that passengers present an equal threat to officer safety as the driver. It appears as thought the court confirmed that police are entitled to ID all occupants of a vehicle when the vehicle had been properly seized.
Thanks!
.
In Kansas you can't unless they weren't wearing their seat belt are the suspect in a crime or there are exigent circumstances i.e. blood everywhere or drugs all over the car.
I would get the passenger ID by asking the driver if they want their friend to drive the car to avoid the tow. I can always determine the passenger might have a BAC too high to let them actually take the car after I have their ID if applicable.
"gotcha" he sounds all sad and unhappy already...
How did the officer know the females were under age? Did they ID? Was the driver drunk? Not sure how he legally got to the point of IDing the passenger.
I don’t know if I heard that correct, even with RAS and a lawful detention people in California do not have to identify themselves? Is there a specific law/case law that explains that?
PC 148 does not have an identity requirement. There is not legal consequence for refusing to ID in California.