TexasCHLforum.com

A friend raised a question regarding showing the CHL when stopped by an LEO, and I realized I'd never really thought about it. Does this give permission/cause for the officer to conduct a search of the vehicle?

No.

If anything is open or if you give permission a LEO can look in. if your trunk, glove box , or console is open the officer can search it. roll up windows and shut your doors if asked to step out of vehicle.

I asked a similar question to a Constable's assistant who does ride alongs. I asked about probable cause and what constitutes it. I was informed that if you are pulled over by an officer, that alone could constitute probable cause. And if an officer wishes to search your vehicle, you have no immediate legal recourse. You simply have to let them, and then file a claim/lawsuit/whine session later on. Has anybody else ever gotten a different answer?

kauboy wrote:I asked a similar question to a Constable's assistant who does ride alongs. I asked about probable cause and what constitutes it. I was informed that if you are pulled over by an officer, that alone could constitute probable cause. And if an officer wishes to search your vehicle, you have no immediate legal recourse. You simply have to let them, and then file a claim/lawsuit/whine session later on. Has anybody else ever gotten a different answer?

He'd like to believe that. It's just not true.

If an officer sees anything in plain sight, that doesn't constitute a search. For instance, if you have a bag of weed on your front seat, he can grab it and arrest you for it. Same thing if he smells the smell.

Now what a lot of officers will do is team up. One will ask you to step out of the car, and hope you leave your door open. His partner, while you aren't paying attention, will start to paw through your belongings. If he finds anything, he will either claim it's in plain sight. In some places, if you specifically don't tell an officer he doesn't have permission to search, he might search, and it might hold up.

If you're worried about this for whatever reason (doesn't matter why, it's your right) specifically tell the officer you do not consent to a search. If you step out of your car, close and lock the door, and specifically tell the officer that you do not consent to any searches.

Now, this doesn't apply if the officer gets probable cause by some other method, like, if he feels you're driving impared, for instance.

It depends on what you get pulled over for. Just having a busted taillight isn't probable cause. Reckless driving might be, especially if you fail a sobriety test.

This is just my civillian understanding of the law, I'm sure the lawyers and officers will correct bits and pieces, which will just futher my education on the subject!

You could ask the folks over at the ACLU

I don't know if I would trust their advice about firearms related issues

Information on general searches. Results may vary.
http://www.flexyourrights.org/

Watch the video
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 1350501823

fadlan12 wrote:If anything is open or if you give permission a LEO can look in. if your trunk, glove box , or console is open the officer can search it. roll up windows and shut your doors if asked to step out of vehicle.

Are you suggesting he do that before or after complying?

I keep my glove box locked as a general rule, and will be installing a console safe in the near future. Everything of value will be in those two places, or on my person. That deters the bad guys as well as the "good guys".

The legal advice in this thread, please pardon my bluntness, it TERRIBLE.

A LEO does not need Probable Cause to search a vehicle, he simpy needs reasonable suspicion. A a protective search of the passenger compartment of a car if an officer possesses ''a reasonable belief, based on specific and articulable facts . . . that the suspect is dangerous and . . . may gain immediate control of weapons" is allowed. (Michigan v. Long, 463 U.S. 1032 (1983))

An officer may search a vehicle minus a search warrant also based on several other factors;

1. Search Incident to Arrest ;

2. Inventory Search of an arrested persons vehicle

3. Probable Cause

4. Extigent Circumstances.

5. Plain View

6. Consent

kauboy wrote: I asked a similar question to a Constable's assistant who does ride alongs. I asked about probable cause and what constitutes it. I was informed that if you are pulled over by an officer, that alone could constitute probable cause. And if an officer wishes to search your vehicle, you have no immediate legal recourse. You simply have to let them, and then file a claim/lawsuit/whine session later on. Has anybody else ever gotten a different answer?

nitrogen wrote:He'd like to believe that. It's just not true.

It depends upon what you were pulled over for, but generally it does not constitutue PC. However, he is right about one thing. If an officer decides to search you or your vehicle you have no legal method to stop it on the street.

Texas Law makes this clear;

Texas Penal Code
§9.31. Self-defense.

(b) The use of force against another is not justified:


(2) to resist an arrest or search that the actor knows is
being made by a peace officer, or by a person acting in a peace
officer's presence and at his direction, even though the arrest or
search is unlawful....

§38.03. Resisting arrest, search, or transportation.

(a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally prevents
or obstructs a person he knows is a peace officer or a person acting
in a peace officer's presence and at his direction from effecting an
arrest, search, or transportation of the actor or another by using
force against the peace officer or another.

(b) It is no defense to prosecution under this section that
the arrest or search was unlawful.

rodc13 wrote:A friend raised a question regarding showing the CHL when stopped by an LEO, and I realized I'd never really thought about it. Does this give permission/cause for the officer to conduct a search of the vehicle?

It MIGHT give the officer reasonable suspicion under Terry to search for weapons, based on the totality of the circumstances.

nitrogen wrote:Now what a lot of officers will do is team up. One will ask you to step out of the car, and hope you leave your door open. His partner, while you aren't paying attention, will start to paw through your belongings.

and you base this opinion on what? LEO's cannot just "paw" through your belongings, and I know of none who do so illegally.

nitrogen wrote: If he finds anything, he will either claim it's in plain sight.

Are you saying they will perform an illegal search and then lie about how they discovered it? And you didn't finish your sentence, "either claim its in plain site" or what?

nitrogen wrote:In some places, if you specifically don't tell an officer he doesn't have permission to search, he might search, and it might hold up

. In all places, he does not need permission if he has one of the other exceptions. If not, I don't know of any officer who is willing to risk federal civil rights charges, loss of job and perjury charges to illegally search your vehicle.


Bottom line regarding the initial question of this thread. It really matters not IN THE MOMENT if you believe a LEO has a right to search your vehicle or not. If he asks consent and you don't want to give it, don't give it.

If he does anyway you have no recourse to stop it, AT THAT TIME. If contraband is discovered (I say shame on you and you deserve jail) the courts will decide if the evidence is admissable.

And if no contraband is found? I would assume the officer could find himself/herself in serious trouble, would the searchee also have a civil suit for damages?

Dave B.

bauerdj wrote:And if no contraband is found? I would assume the officer could find himself/herself in serious trouble, would the searchee also have a civil suit for damages?

Dave B.

Thats a good question. If the officer had one of the exceptions to the search warrant requirement then there would be no cause for action against him, even if no contraband was found.

And if the court ruled that no actual exception to the search warrant requirement existed, but the officer acted in good faith and reasonably believed that an exception existed, then there would be no cause.

You would pretty much have to show that the officer knew or should have known that no exception existed and acted anyway.

Remember, many of these ruling take YEARS for the courts to make.

txinvestigator wrote:

fadlan12 wrote:If anything is open or if you give permission a LEO can look in. if your trunk, glove box , or console is open the officer can search it. roll up windows and shut your doors if asked to step out of vehicle.

Are you suggesting he do that before or after complying?

the leo can search if these things happen

this is my suggestion to prevent in the event you don't give consent

IF you have NOTHING to hide, what's the problem?

I have nothing to hide... anyone may come and search my vehicle at any time for I have nothing, no drugs, no illegal contraband--nothing, nada, zilch.

I could care less if they look.

Could be that they have a reason to stop and search my vehicle. Could be that there is an "APB" or something (if they even still have "APB's") out for:

1) a vehicle fitting the description of my vehicle or
2) a description of a person fitting either me or my passenger(s) (assuming I'm driving.) or
3) I did something wrong (a traffic violation) and after questioning me, I give inconsistant answers to questions.

In any case, I don't drink and drive, heck I rarely drink at home! I don't do illegal drugs. I'm not a member of any gang. Heck, I just don't do illegal--speeding not included in above statement!

Why, as a law-abiding citizen, should I care if these law enforcement officers are doing their job as in 1, 2 or 3 above.

Things go south (IMHO) very quickly when the stopee gets beligerant and starts demanding that the LEO's stop and desist... why? Are they hiding something illegal? Are they a fugitive? Things like this start popping up in my head and I'm not even a lawyer or a LEO.

Just my opinion...
Russ

Russ-
I agree that many problems can be solved with a willingness to cooperate and a respectul attitude, which is what I have always offered and walked away each time without a criminal record. If you go looking for trouble...you will find it. This applies all aspects of life in my opinion.

For the sake of conversation......do you feel the same way about LEO searching other parts of your personal property.....your home, yard, boat?

I think there is a fine line that is easily crossed when it comes to the authority officers have and their practice of abusing it. I generally feel that most people are good people, but I do not want anyone going through my things unless they have a valid reason to do so. My point being that if I am pulled over and an officer just decides to violate my personal belongings out of mere curiosity....I will do what I can to make a formal stink about it. I would never create a disturbance like this on the side of the road..that is one that I could never win.

Remember that if an officer is doing something that is illegal....making him/her lie about it later is considered a victory in my book. Is this really a problem for most of us here?

Jason

kw5kw wrote:IF you have NOTHING to hide, what's the problem?

Ummm... maybe this:
Amendment IV
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.

kw5kw wrote:I have nothing to hide... anyone may come and search my vehicle at any time for I have nothing, no drugs, no illegal contraband--nothing, nada, zilch.

I could care less if they look.

Some of us have an expectation of (if not an enumerated right to) privacy, and don't want strangers examining our belongings.

kw5kw wrote:Could be that they have a reason to stop and search my vehicle. Could be that there is an "APB" or something (if they even still have "APB's") out for:

1) a vehicle fitting the description of my vehicle or
2) a description of a person fitting either me or my passenger(s) (assuming I'm driving.) or
3) I did something wrong (a traffic violation) and after questioning me, I give inconsistant answers to questions.

In that case, they should provide the reason and I would be willing to consider or allow it, depending on the specifics.

kw5kw wrote:In any case, I don't drink and drive, heck I rarely drink at home! I don't do illegal drugs. I'm not a member of any gang. Heck, I just don't do illegal--speeding not included in above statement!

Why, as a law-abiding citizen, should I care if these law enforcement officers are doing their job as in 1, 2 or 3 above.

Things go south (IMHO) very quickly when the stopee gets beligerant and starts demanding that the LEO's stop and desist... why? Are they hiding something illegal? Are they a fugitive? Things like this start popping up in my head and I'm not even a lawyer or a LEO.

Just my opinion...
Russ

I understand where you're coming from, but I disagree. I can (and have) politely and courteously asked for reasons WHY they want to search. If it seems reasonable to me, I have allowed it. If it did not, I would decline permission. I would NOT expect that to stop them if they feel they have legitimate reason to search my vehicle, but refusal of permission cannot be construed as probable cause.