Supreme Court narrows traffic stop searches

[some seeing eye]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volo ... urt-rules/

6-3 is better than 5-4, but 9-0 would have been better yet. Let's hope in a few years some of these wrongful death cases make it through the courts.

[Elderberry]

Moved this to Open Discussion as it had nothing to do with Burning Man politics.

[Lonesomebri]

The Supreme Court handed down a notable Fourth Amendment ruling this morning in Rodriguez v. United States, holding that the Fourth Amendment does not allow the police to extend the duration of a traffic stop without reasonable suspicion, even for just a “de minimis” amount of time, for reasons unrelated to vehicle and driver safety. The vote was 6-3, with Justice Ginsburg writing for the majority and Justices Kennedy, Thomas, and Alito dissenting...
The issue in the case: When the police make a routine traffic stop, can the police delay the duration of the stop, even just for a small amount of time, to wait for drug sniffing dogs, absent any articulable suspicion to believe that there are drugs in the car?

One foot down that dusty road out on to the playa and it does become Burning Man politics. Good news for personal rights fanatics and people who don't know how to hook a bicycle onto the back of their car without blocking the license plate. Know your rights!

[some seeing eye]

It is something LEAL should discuss with LEO.

[Elderberry]

Couple of thoughts on this. 1. Note the three judges that voted against it and remember who appointed them when you go out to vote. and 2. Totally agree about knowing your rights; though in this climate I can see standing up for your rights is something that could easily leave your shot or beaten for resisting an officer or for being a wise-guy and the cop feeling "disrespected" and we have seen where that can get you too. (Pains me that thought would even have to cross my mind.)

[Elliot]

...absent any articulable suspicion...

Now there is a useful word.

Interesting, and positive, that the Reagan/Bush appointees were split, but yeah... the three dissenters were Reagan and Bush people.

...articulable suspicion... Love it. Assuming the concept of "gut feel" has been abused, this phrase holds promise of a more reliable standard.

[Popeye]

Might to be useful to note that this does not stop the dog from sniffing your car but only the cop from holding you until the dog shows up. I can see a lot of cops taking their time to write a ticket hoping the K9 will arrive soon.
Nevertheless a step in the right direction.

[Molotov]

I don't think this SCOTUS decision gives anybody carte blanche permission to just get in their car and drive off if you feel the traffic stop is being prolonged for arrival of a narcopooch. It's a good way to get your car spiked, rammed and you tasered or worse.

I think all it does it lay the groundwork for dismissal of any evidence found by a sniffer hound after an artificially prolonged traffic stop.

As the Po-Po is fond of saying, "You may beat the rap, but you can't beat the ride" and all the hassle of getting handcuffed, booked, vehicle seized, etc. even if the charges are thrown out later.

There is another gray area.... A warrantless search by police is permitted of a vehicle being impounded after the arrest of the driver to inventory the contents. I would imagine any drugs found during an inventory search after an arrest later found to be illegal would be considered "fruit of the poisonous tree" but who is to say until case law is made?

BTW, I'm not a lawyer, but grew up watching all the episodes of Matlock I could find....

[Captain Goddammit]

So what are you carrying that you're worried that they will find?

*cough cough loser cough cough