Stop/Search?

[coppercon]

Last night I was called to a house of a guy who gave me some detailed information on a male who was returning to our city with a lot of cocaine and marijuana. He told me what he was driving, who he was with, where he was coming from, and how long he had been gone for.
Would I have been able to stop or search him or the vehicle based on the information?
I remember something about anonymous tips being specific and what not but I don't know if this would apply.
The guy who was bringing the stuff back had people coming to his house all the time. They stop by his house and he gets in the car with them. They drive away and return about 10 minutes later and he hops out and the car leaves. I have talked with the neighbors and they tell me stories about a lot of different people going into the house and only staying for a short period of time.
Any help would be appreciated.
Thanks

[gecko3s]

Arent there senior officers/supervisors at your agency who could answer this for you?

[DOAcop38]

sounds like a good reason for a "wall stop" there - use veh.code or other PC to stop,(but I'd get in quick contact with a Det first or area Narco unit/team)

[Frank Booth]

How was it an anonymous tip if you were called to the guys house? Couldn't you ID him? Read "Alabama Vs. White". That's pretty much the leading case for what an anonymous tip/corroboration needs to be before it equals probable cause. That's assuming you couldn't identify that guy who gave you the information.

In order for an anyonymous tip to be good enough for probable cause, the informant has to be able to tell you what the suspect is going to do in the FUTURE. For instance: "He's going to get into a white chevy, then he's going to drive to 123 Maple street, then he's going to pull out a brown bag and the bag has cocaine in it." Then the police have to corroborate the information, in other words, they have to watch the suspect to confirm whether the informant actually DID have intimate knowledge of what the suspect was going to do in the future.

I don't think an anonymous tip that says where a guy has BEEN and for how long is good enough. What would stop someone from planting some dope in your trunk, then following you with a cloned cell phone and saying to the police: "OK, now he's going south on Main Street, he was at McDonalds where he ate a cheesburger for a half an hour, and before that, he was at Sears looking at lawnmowers. When you stop him, you'll find a bag of weed in his trunk." See what I mean?? That kind of scenario is not reasonable suspicion, much less probable cause unless you can ID the person who is providing the info.

[zap]

I gotta go with the failure to signal myself (or some other such heneous crime) and pull the string carefully from there...

[sflcop]

I agree with others. Use a traffic stop as PC and see where it can get you. It is a fine line with the knowledge you have, and you do not want to push it, however there is nothing that says during a traffic stop that you cannot run a dog around the car. That in and of itself is not a violation of someone's civil rights, so long as it is within a reasonable amount of time.

[J_Mann]

I'd say talk to your prosecutor. He has the ultament decision on whether he's gonna take it or not. If you could get the person who tipped you off to write a written statement you'd probably be covered, but that's iffy.

It's not hard to get PC for a traffic stop. Not stopping at/before the stop bar is good enough for me.

[firedog974]

It all comes down to how well you articulate your stop in your report. I would really listen to whoever posted the "Alabama vs. White" post. Case law can be very different from statutory law. Like my Lt always tells us....Don't get "By Law" and "By Gosh" confused... we are here to enforce "By Law." What I mean by that is By gosh you know the guy is selling dope, but by law you haven't seen anything that gives you PC to search the guy or his vehicle/home. I think your best option is to follow until you have good PC for a vehicle stop. Then from there his responses to your questions during that stop will tell you all you need to know. Then just call out the dogs and get your cuffs ready. I would be cautious on using a turn signal for PC unless other traffic is impacted (same with stop sign). You may want to check your state, but here in Florida if you discover dope on a stop sign/ turn signal stop and it is discovered no traffic was impacted by the suspects failure to stop/signal the case will be thrown out. I just had one thrown out the other day where the guy had 42 methadone tabs (no script of course) in a tylenol bottle and a .38 special under his seat. It was thrown out because my PC was the guy not using a turn signal and the defense found out no traffic was impacted. I knew it was going to be thrown out, however I also knew the guy had drugs and I got them and a gun off the street. My PC for the stop was legit according to statutory law, but case law got it thrown out.

[zap]

I just had one thrown out the other day where the guy had 42 methadone tabs (no script of course) in a tylenol bottle and a .38 special under his seat. It was thrown out because my PC was the guy not using a turn signal and the defense found out no traffic was impacted. I knew it was going to be thrown out, however I also knew the guy had drugs and I got them and a gun off the street. My PC for the stop was legit according to statutory law, but case law got it thrown out.


That's messed up

[1042 Trooper]

Now you know the precise reason they invented license plate lights - and gave them the inate ability to burn out or be too dim to read the plate. It's also the reason God gave us plastic taillight lenses that crack; exposing white light to the rear, headlamps that burn out and of course, that pesky rule about coming to a full and complete stop. :D

[Dinosaur32]

Here in NY, 3 AM no one on the street for blocks and you change lanes without the proper signal and you can be stopped and ticketed, No defense that traffic wasn't impacted. And our courts have upheld such pretextural stops.

[NJTrooper]

I just had one thrown out the other day where the guy had 42 methadone tabs (no script of course) in a tylenol bottle and a .38 special under his seat. It was thrown out because my PC was the guy not using a turn signal and the defense found out no traffic was impacted. I knew it was going to be thrown out, however I also knew the guy had drugs and I got them and a gun off the street. My PC for the stop was legit according to statutory law, but case law got it thrown out.

doesnt your cruiser count as traffic..

[SlowDownThere]

Here in NY, 3 AM no one on the street for blocks and you change lanes without the proper signal and you can be stopped and ticketed, No defense that traffic wasn't impacted. And our courts have upheld such pretextural stops.

The courts recently re-upheld them. But for several years, pretextual stops were not valid in NYS. Oh, I don't want to research this, but I suppose I'll have to now.

SDT

[firedog974]

doesnt your cruiser count as traffic..
Yes it does but I was way behind him just waiting for PC...It was one of those "just give me some PC" stops where you know the guy driving is a dirtbag and you know your gonna find something. It was during daylight hours so the ol' trusty taglight PC wasn't an option. It sucks it got tossed, but I got the drugs and gun......You can beat the wrap but not the ride!!!

[Henrik M]

What reason do you people need to be allowed to stop cars? Do you need to suspect a crime, a traffic violation or whatever has been committed?

In Sweden, we can stop any vehicle on the road. I can stop a car to check the driver's license, if I like to. So if I'm curious about who is driving a car, I can just pull him over and check. I would always have him perform an alcohol test as well.

[Wile E. Coyote]

Some good advice I got was that if you are going to use minor violations such as a license plate light as a pretext, stop about 10 people for that violation and document it by written warning or cite before you start using it for interdiction. That can help against claims that it was a C/S stop just to get at the drugs, since you can show you routinely stop for those violations.

[BritPC]

Henrik,

We're the same in the UK as you are in Sweden. I can stop any vehicle on the road for no more reason than to check driving documents. No offences or 'probable cause' is needed to do this. If a vehicle looks dodgy we just pull it.

[motorwaycop]

Henrik,

We're the same in the UK as you are in Sweden. I can stop any vehicle on the road for no more reason than to check driving documents. No offences or 'probable cause' is needed to do this. If a vehicle looks dodgy we just pull it.
It seems to be about the only thing we still have going for us doesn't it.
Although we're now being told that unless we give ask them to produce documents or some other paperwork we have to fill in an encounter form and give them a copy, although I don't always bother.

[SHERIFF]

Now you know the precise reason they invented license plate lights - and gave them the inate ability to burn out or be too dim to read the plate. It's also the reason God gave us plastic taillight lenses that crack; exposing white light to the rear, headlamps that burn out and of course, that pesky rule about coming to a full and complete stop. :D

Don't need a real violation. We had a local county officer who would say, "Well sir, your brake lights weren't working when I stopped you, but they seem to be fine now! You must have a short in your electrical wiring, have it checked maybe? How many beers have you had tonight?" :D

(True story)

[zap]

Don't need a real violation. We had a local county officer who would say, "Well sir, your brake lights weren't working when I stopped you, but they seem to be fine now! You must have a short in your electrical wiring, have it checked maybe? How many beers have you had tonight?" :D

(True story)


Like the old Georga sheriff said.... "It is a TESTIMONY problem!"

[SHERIFF]

Like the old Georga sheriff said.... "It is a TESTIMONY problem!"

Ohh, I agree. The officer I was speaking of was eventually fired for falsifying speedometer calibrations anyway.

[1042 Trooper]

Ohh, I agree. The officer I was speaking of was eventually fired for falsifying speedometer calibrations anyway.
I was gonna say, this sounded a bit ... uh ... illegal. YA THINK?
:D

[Bushranger]

Henrik,

We're the same in the UK as you are in Sweden. I can stop any vehicle on the road for no more reason than to check driving documents. No offences or 'probable cause' is needed to do this. If a vehicle looks dodgy we just pull it.

Same here down under. Conduct a registration check with communications, intercept the vehicle and conduct random license check, random breath tests, conduct a roadside safety check for defects on the vehicle, run a license and name check on the driver/ registered owner, the passengers, etc. Who knows, an outstanding warrant may surface for the driver/ passenger or reasonable suspicion may arise out of your observations and you may just have to act upon them, so long as your actions are lawful and justified.

[lowdrag]

If time permitted, with the detail your informant was giving, you probably could have gotten a warrant to search the house and vehicle. Providing you could have convinced him to go before the judge with you as an anonymous informant and swear to the information he was providing.

[SHERIFF]

I was gonna say, this sounded a bit ... uh ... illegal. YA THINK?
:D

Well, of course it is! :)

And I know it's true because he used the same excuse to stop my brother in a brand new Corvette one night. My brother had never had any electrical problems before or after his traffic stop. After the initial electrical wiring discussion he blurped out, "How many beers have you had tonight?" to my brother too. It was actually becoming a joke around town. Maybe this is why he came under close scrutiny for the other things he was doing. Or not doing in the case of the speedometer calibrations. :D