Probable cause?
This is a discussion on Probable cause? within the Drugs Charges forum, part of the Arrests, Searches, Seizures category; I walked up to a motel room raid. I never entered the room, I just asked the officer at the ...
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
#1 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
I walked up to a motel room raid. I never entered the room, I just asked the officer at the open door what was going on. They detained me and made me wait. Then they asked if I would consent to a search of my vehicle. I asked why, I hadn't done anything wrong except express interest in what was going on at an aquantences motel room. They couldn't give me a good reason so I said no. They continued to detain me until the k9 unit got there. Can they do that?
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
being a passenger in a car that drugs was in. what are my rights. my Miranda rights was not told to me before the search
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Pearl MS
Posts: 8
|
(1st poster)yes, they can detain you for a K9, you did right by refusing consent, more people should,
(2nd poster)not reading you your Miranda prior to vehicle search makes no difference. Last edited by lwsii; Nov 6th, 2008 at 08:09 PM. |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
The answer is "yes". You can be detained for a "reasonable" amount of time. Many federal courts have found that up to 90 minutes is reasonable.
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Smitty: The police do not have to read you the Miranda Warning unless they intend to question you about an offense. Everyone thinks (from watching too much TV) that the police are required to read the Miranda Warning on every arrest made. I reiterate...I the police intend to question you about an offense, then they are required to read the Miranda Warning prior to questioning.
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
see also WORLDLawDirect - Miranda
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
To understand probable cause, you first must understand the court case Mapp vs. Ohio. Under the court case, Mapp vs. Ohio, the police did not have a legal search warrant to search a woman's house, which was suspected to have illegal substances. Come to find out, not only did she have "illegal substances" but she also had substantial amounts of pornography- the situation could have gone along in these 3 different ways-
1. They could have gotten a search warrant-no questions asked. 2. They searched the house illegally, but under the Exclusionary Rule, all evidence found that was not originally intended for when doing the search, would have been excluded- such as the porn. 3. Under probable cause it requires the use of the five senses or under suspicion in which, IT DOES NOT REQUIRE A SEARCH WARRANT! In your case, the Miranda Rights would not apply here. That would only be for your 5th amendment rights, your right to an attorney. In that case, you would've had to been convicted of a crime, in which you were not.Therefore it's null and void... So a long story short, yes, they has EVERY RIGHT to search you vehicle under probable cause- EVEN IF YOU WERE NOT INVOLVED! XD! Sad isn't it? !
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmark & Share |
| Tags |
| None |
This thread has 6 replies and has been viewed 719 times
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Probable Cause | Unregistered | Arrests, Searches, Seizures | 2 | May 11th, 2009 09:29 AM |
| what is probable cause | mazpn | Arrests, Searches, Seizures | 1 | Apr 8th, 2009 10:35 AM |
| what is probable cause | mazpn | Arrests, Searches, Seizures | 1 | Apr 8th, 2009 10:01 AM |
| probable cause | jplamb | Arrests, Searches, Seizures | 0 | Mar 25th, 2009 01:25 PM |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:31 AM.





!





Linear Mode

