Supreme Court Says Police May Search Even If Arrest is Invalid!

Originally posted by NettleTea

Originally posted by Maxmars


Actually the determination was that the scope of the search was not legal, but despite that fact, they allowed the evidence to be used against him.

Thank you for responding. Here is where I'm getting tripped up.

If he was placed under arrest and the drugs were seized from his person than those drugs should be admissible.

Now if they were seized from the car I think the police would have had to 1. seen the drugs in plain view or 2. the driver was wigged out on drugs and that gave the police probable cause to think there were drugs in the car.

I am not sure if the cops can openly search your car after your under arrest.

If the VA court ruled that the scope was not legal then I would have to see the circumstance they cited. From what I read though I thought the police acted within their right.

Let me check L/N if I can find a citation, but I suspect there is more here than meets the eye. Sadly, going by media reporting is always a slippery slope - you KNOW how clear and accurate they tend to be...

This Supreme Court has me thinking abortion was framed as a conservative issue in order to polarize judges and stack the court. I wish my fellow ameraican good luck. We have met the enemy and he is us.

Police can search your car if they ask you to step out and you leave the car door open. They consider it "implied consent to search."

Now, in my opinion the driver is an asshat. Driving with a suspended license is bad enough but to do it with drugs in the car is straight up stupid. BUT! Stupidity is not an offense worthy of being imprisoned, and the search was done ILLEGALLY, the seizure was done ILLEGALLY, and the arrest was ILLEGAL.

The fact that it was illegal is the reason this made it to the Supreme Court. The fact that they decided it was legal doesn't make it square with the constitution.

[edit on 24-4-2008 by BlaznRob]

The media does not tell of any past or prior arrests that the officer would have seen running his Suspended license. Nor do they know exactly how many times the police in that jurisdiction let him go on his word he would do right in the future.

Possession of crack coc aine is not the same as a baggy full of pot.

Further he may have gotten off for much worse crimes in the past the media isn't sharing.

Anyone who is pulled over and does not have a valid license and insurance, the same responsibility that everyone else on the road is required to have, should be looked at very closely because they have already thumbed their nose at authority.

The whole search may have hinged on the perception he was under the influence of drugs or acting in a suspicious manner.

He may have given permission to search verbally and then lied in court.

It takes a whole lot more than bad reporting to sort these things out.

When you see these articles, copy and paste the reporters name and agency into google and find out what slant or spin they usually take in their reporting. you will be very surprised when you investigate the reporter as well as the story......

When one has a history of unethical reporting just to crank out a story......

www.slate.com...

[edit on 24-4-2008 by Illahee]

Originally posted by BlaznRob
Driving with a suspended license is bad enough but to do it with drugs in the car is straight up stupid. BUT! Stupidity is not an offense worthy of being imprisoned, and the search was done ILLEGALLY, the seizure was done ILLEGALLY, and the arrest was ILLEGAL.

[edit on 24-4-2008 by BlaznRob]

Thanks for the info about the implied consent to search. I did not know that.

I have to disagree, the arrest was legal. Driving with a suspended license in Virginia is a crime (misdemeanor) and is an arrestable offense. With a legal arrest the search of the offenders person, and depending upon the facts of the case, his car is legal. If the cops find something in the process of the lawful search then it is legal to use against him.

I don't understand why the VA Supreme Court ruled the way they did, but I am just glad the US Supreme Court ruled as they did.

reply to post by DimensionalDetective


What some have to come to grips with here in this forum and the world outside is many people are not affected by any of what our governemtn is doing; they don't own guns, they have never had their door kicked in by the police at 4am in the morning, never had DPS come take their children and when they fly, they are good little cows. Get it?

Some of these people still live at home; while others live in a big city where they are just another bug in the rug and while others live and work in as part of the corporate/governemtn system...they eat, sleep, pay their taxes, play..live all within the framework the state and feds say is normal. They don't have much use of the special aspects of our Constitution because they are already cooperative bond slave and subsequently don't feel the loss of anything as piece by piece what makes being and living in America so special is eaten away. They will not realize something is wrong until they are told when and how they can travel to see their aunt or when they are told they can not buy anymore of this or that...these people are already made for the NWO..they are not true Americans..they are a sub-species. Many are immigrants and whatever we have is far better than they had. This was part of the trick about immigration...1/2 country is from the 3rd world..they are glad to have a job and eat. They are also the ones who will be used against the rest of us.

Yes, it is a nightmare but some of us are going to escape.