I think more relevant is a PC search, specifically for stolen items. Eye witness testimony, cameras, etc that gives you PC to cite also gives PC to search.
How about this scenario? In Minnesota we have “rule 6” which allows officer to book someone for a misdemeanor crime. What can happen is that officers arrest someone under the rule 6 and conduct a search incident to arrest. Officers then decide to cite the suspect and let him go. The misdemeanor crimes are bookable offenses in certain counties. I do understand that after issuing a citation, you don’t search the person for the same charge. But before issuing a citation, you claim that you “arrest”ed someone with intent to take him to a jail and you changed your mind. In this case, is the search legal?
This scenario would not likely violate the Fourth Amendment. Typically, subjective factors such as the arresting officer's intent are not relevant considerations in a Fourth Amendment analysis (although subjective intent can be a consideration in inventory search cases apparently). The question would be whether at the time of the search, the person was subjected to a custodial arrest. Events that occur after the search (e.g., the officer changes his mind and decides to issue a citation) would not be relevant to whether the search was lawful. This is a situation where agency policy may step in and provide a solution. In the interest of maintaining positive community relations, an agency may require its officers to complete the custodial arrest process once the search incident to arrest has been made. In other words, the policy would not permit the officer to "change his mind" after the search; he must complete the custodial arrest process by taking the arrestee to the jail or booking facility. Zach Miller-Blue to Gold Legal Instructor
No, you cannot search this person at all. It you're citing a person and releasing him in the field, there is no authority to search him unless you have either reasonable suspicion he's armed (at which point you may frisk him for weapons) or where you have reason to believe he's in possession of evidence relevant to the offense for which he's being cited. Jaywalking most definitely is not an example of the latter. Zach Miller-Blue to Gold Legal Instructor
I'm teaching in Melbourne on April 22 and near Daytona Beach on June 14. I'll be sure to emphasize this point in class! Zach Miller-Blue to Gold Legal Instructor
What if it’s not a cite in the field but an arrest and cite release from the jail?
yes
Thats an arrest.
I think more relevant is a PC search, specifically for stolen items. Eye witness testimony, cameras, etc that gives you PC to cite also gives PC to search.
So you can violate the rights of anyone under the flimsiest allegations
@@garyjohnson8327 It's called PC, not flimsiest allegations. Literally evidence lol
How about this scenario? In Minnesota we have “rule 6” which allows officer to book someone for a misdemeanor crime. What can happen is that officers arrest someone under the rule 6 and conduct a search incident to arrest. Officers then decide to cite the suspect and let him go. The misdemeanor crimes are bookable offenses in certain counties.
I do understand that after issuing a citation, you don’t search the person for the same charge. But before issuing a citation, you claim that you “arrest”ed someone with intent to take him to a jail and you changed your mind. In this case, is the search legal?
I’d say absolutely not. It’d be no different than inventorying a vehicle to get consent in absence of PC.
This scenario would not likely violate the Fourth Amendment. Typically, subjective factors such as the arresting officer's intent are not relevant considerations in a Fourth Amendment analysis (although subjective intent can be a consideration in inventory search cases apparently). The question would be whether at the time of the search, the person was subjected to a custodial arrest. Events that occur after the search (e.g., the officer changes his mind and decides to issue a citation) would not be relevant to whether the search was lawful.
This is a situation where agency policy may step in and provide a solution. In the interest of maintaining positive community relations, an agency may require its officers to complete the custodial arrest process once the search incident to arrest has been made. In other words, the policy would not permit the officer to "change his mind" after the search; he must complete the custodial arrest process by taking the arrestee to the jail or booking facility.
Zach Miller-Blue to Gold Legal Instructor
So, if someone is being cited for jaywalking, can you search them for drugs?
No, you cannot search this person at all. It you're citing a person and releasing him in the field, there is no authority to search him unless you have either reasonable suspicion he's armed (at which point you may frisk him for weapons) or where you have reason to believe he's in possession of evidence relevant to the offense for which he's being cited. Jaywalking most definitely is not an example of the latter.
Zach Miller-Blue to Gold Legal Instructor
Next time you teach a class in Florida, please remind them @@BluetoGold
I'm teaching in Melbourne on April 22 and near Daytona Beach on June 14. I'll be sure to emphasize this point in class!
Zach Miller-Blue to Gold Legal Instructor
What is the Colorado case from which you cited?
The constitution really pisses yall off, innit?