Police breaking into cars for *suspicion* of marijuana

originally posted by: vonclod

I wonder what amount warrants seizure?

Sounds as though it's just about any amount whatsoever:

If you use your car, plane or boat to transport drugs, you will lose your car, plane or boat.

forfeiture

I distinctly remember in high school the cops would hang out in the school parking lot in a a souped up Mustang that read something like "This car used to belong to a drug dealer" written across the side of it.

I remember thinking what assholes the cops were.

a reply to: vonclod

Remember, this is also the state that all but brags and dances a Jig right there in the street when their cops get someone on a show like COPS with *ONE* stray prescription pill which may not have every piece of paper trail to explain the origin of the wayward pill. I think they have a precinct Pizza party if they catch a soccer mom with a full bottle.

In many states, the possession of these prescription narcotic drugs that were not prescribed for you will result in mandatory prison sentences. For example, in Florida, a person who is convicted of being in possession of:

* Four to six pills (some tablets contain a larger amount of the drug, i.e. 40 milligrams or 80 milligrams) of these narcotic drugs--a three year mandatory prison sentence
* 25-30 pills—15 year mandatory prison sentence
* 80-100 pills—25 year mandatory prison sentence

Source

Nice, understanding and compassionate state...isn't it? They're just all heart down there. (Note the mandatory nature)

a reply to: Wrabbit2000

When considering the Bill of Rights, I'd speculate that no other Amendment has been eroded and attacked as much as the 4th...probably more so than the others combined. And in my opinion, it is the one that poses the greatest direct threat against the citizens of the U.S. if it fully disappears.

The second will probably follow with a direct repeal, and the 1st will slowly be eroded much like the 4th. And who cares about the 5th, most don't understand (even state supreme courts) its intended contex.

a reply to: thisguyrighthere
Yes i guess they can pretty much do what they want, i suppose a small amount for personal use might warrant holding the vehicle hostage for a fine in the best case?..i guess generating revenue is a big part of the game. Its pretty crazy how a few states over i might be completley legal.

originally posted by: Wrabbit2000
a reply to: vonclod



Remember, this is also the state that all but brags and dances a Jig right there in the street when their cops get someone on a show like COPS with *ONE* stray prescription pill which may not have every piece of paper trail to explain the origin of the wayward pill. I think they have a precinct Pizza party if they catch a soccer mom with a full bottle.

In many states, the possession of these prescription narcotic drugs that were not prescribed for you will result in mandatory prison sentences. For example, in Florida, a person who is convicted of being in possession of:



* Four to six pills (some tablets contain a larger amount of the drug, i.e. 40 milligrams or 80 milligrams) of these narcotic drugs--a three year mandatory prison sentence

* 25-30 pills—15 year mandatory prison sentence

* 80-100 pills—25 year mandatory prison sentence

Source



Nice, understanding and compassionate state...isn't it? They're just all heart down there. (Note the mandatory nature)

Wow im shocked..i never knew that it was that bad in this day..unfortunatly our fed govt has put into effect mandatory sentencing about a year ago(nothing as insane as florida) and now as the cases are coming to court judges are refusing to apply the mandatory minimums on the basis that they are unconstitutional. The fed is of course appealing but its nice to see the judiciary here stick it to our govt for its wrongheaded approach on what are really social problems and not truley criminal matters.
Lets hope for better.
Cheers

Wow you people are gullible. I have a bridge to sell you!

Police cracking a vehicle are not going to leave a handwritten note. They either would of remained to arrest the owner/driver of the vehicle or they would of impounded it.

Either someone else broke into the vehicle and stole your pot and left the note as a gag or deterrent to call the police.

Or someone sold someone's pot and claimed the police searched it.

That is what i was thinking, someone just broke into the car and left some BS note on there. Sounds like a good idea

a reply to: nixie_nox

Or not:

News Channel 8 reached out to TPD to ask about the search and we were told by email, "While the search is legal, it is not typical. The Tampa Police Department is now reviewing the specifics of this investigation."

Heller said he and his attorney have asked TPD for documentation of the search but he has not heard back. While TPD claims the search was legal, attorney Bryant Camareno doesn’t agree.

That's quite the elaborate scam to have the cops in on it like that.

The Bill of Rights are dead. The police in Florida are getting increasingly out of control. The are above the law and a little thing like the Constitution get in the way of an arrest.

I am not writing this post to bash cops. My personal and family experience with LEO over the past 5 years in Florida has been nothing short of a nightmare. A bad cop, Susanne Ravn of the Brevard County Sheriff Office likes to arrest and tazer people over trumped up charges. She tazed by Dad in a wheelchair and charged with Assaulting a Law Enforcement officer. That psychopath was recently promoted to Corporal, it upsets me that cops can get away with this crap, and even get promoted for their bad behavior. This same cop also likes to perform illegal search and seizures and will swerve her patrol car behind a citizen to make the car look like it's swerving to make a random stop. End of rant.

We the people need to send the message that we will not tolerate this kind of abuse of power.

a reply to: jrod

We need to hold them to the 9th amendment and requisition multiple writs of mandamus for the DOJ to be forced to do their job reining in these abusive types. Any LEO who allows this is equally a part of it.

The article seems to support the police searching the vehicle.

a reply to: abe froman

What in hell are you talking about?!! I said nothing about matching their tactics with same! What planet are you on right now?!!

There are two sides to this issue. The police side is that they "supposedly" got a hit on the car from a trained dog. Sure dogs can smell much better than we can, but I suppose they could be wrong as well. We don't really know what they're thinking. The dog could have a sinister side as well, lol. Then on the other side how can one prove that the dog smelled this substance? You could prove he pawed the car or whatever but that does not actually prove that he smelled an illegal substance.

And if there is not even video documentation of him pawing the car, how do we know the cops weren't looking for an excuse to search it? And for all I know they could have a certain dog that is trained to paw a car on some subtle signal, thus giving them "probable cause." It is not so far-fetched in my opinion, although I know there is a process for police dogs. But who is to say an officer couldn't retrain a dog to do a certain thing?

a reply to: JiggyPotamus

Flip side of what? There is no good in a law that can put people behind bars for a simple non-toxic plant. Now they are using the smell, perceived smell, and scanty hits from a dog to justify warrant-less searches in the name of a plant.

Please kindly tell me how society is better by arresting people for simply possessing a plant?

a reply to: skunkape23

Even if the K-9 alerts to your vehicle, that does not give them permission to search your vehicle. That merely gives them probable cause for a warrant to search your vehicle to be issued.

Florida, what more can you say?

originally posted by: JarheadFidelis
a reply to: skunkape23

Even if the K-9 alerts to your vehicle, that does not give them permission to search your vehicle. That merely gives them probable cause for a warrant to search your vehicle to be issued.

That varies from state to state.

originally posted by: thisguyrighthere

originally posted by: Biigs

A spliffy sniffy coming from your car is grounds for probable cause.

As long as i can remember this has been the case.

It's awesome because there is no way to prove it. Even going so far as to claim a hit by a dog can be wrong 84% of the time.

Want access to any home or vehicle anywhere anytime? Just say you smelled pot!

Likely the truck had driven over roadside marijuana.
this is common in the marijuana growing areas of Mexico and tourist coming back to the US have had the cars taken apart and no drugs found.

This is a 4th issue. Why would states be able to change it.

eta

law.justia.com...

legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com...