|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
|
Welcome to the LegalMatch Free Legal Advice Forums forums. You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us. |
| Find a Lawyer Now By Category: | |||||||
 |
Family & Divorce | |
Criminal Defense | |
Job & Employment | |
Personal Injury |
|
Real Estate Lawyers | |
Immigration | |
Business Lawyers | |
Other Lawyers |
Be assured that
LegalMatch is Fast, Free and Confidential |
|||||||
|
|||||||
| Not Ready To Hire an Expert Lawyer? | |
Get Online Legal Documents | |||||
 |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
09-02-2007, 10:11 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Police searching myself, car, ends with ticket. HELP! HELP! HELP! HELP!
I was driving down Bethel School Rd. and noticed a police officer behind. I made sure I was
obey all the street laws. I checked my speed which was under 30 miles per hour and was slowing down to a complete stop behind the white line while signaling. I was at a standing still for aleast 5 seconds. I made my right turn while still signaling in to Denton Tap with the Denton Tap light just turning green and the officer behind me turned on his lights. I pulled over in to Vanbedder Rd and turned on my car top light so he can see inside the car. He asked to see my hands and I put them outside the window. He asked why I had opened my car door which was because I am use to opening the car door. He tells me that my tint was too dark. I told him they were not because another officer had checked to see the percetage and it was legal during the 4th of July. I gave him my licenses and car insurance. He was back to his car and I was putting up the insurance papers. He came back to the car and asked why I was making movements. I told him I was putting up the insurance. He asked if there was any narcotics or weapons. I told him no and I don't have anything. I said "You could search my car, but you would only be wasting your time." I said could because it is "used to express a possibility" and was not granting him consent to. He was able to, but I did not say he can. He goes back to his car and then back to me and tells me to get out of the car. He starts to search me which I didn't consent to and then to my car. He tells me to sit on the ground and I do. It was 74 degrees and I am not wearing a shirt. I was waiting very long and feeling very cold. Wearing only flip flops and shorts in 74 degree weather gets cold for a little guy like me. I had just came out of bed and leaving for gas. I told the 2nd officer that I did not consent to the search because there was no reason to. The first officer said I did. After waiting for the officer to search my whole car for nothing. He went back to his car and both him and the other officer were talking at his car. I was still sitting on the ground waiting which felt forever. They tell me I can go back to my car and they were still talking and I continued waiting for a long while. He comes back to me and tells me my violation which was failing to stop at a stopping point. I disagree right away because I made sure I was obeying all the laws. All of this took aleast 30 minutes... HELP. I know I gave up my rights when I said "could search my car. " What can I do? I end up feeling like a criminal and a "failure to stop at a stopping point" ticket. How can I beat this ticket? 
|
|
09-03-2007, 06:13 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
First of all, that fact that you stated "You could search the car", implies consent. And secondly, even if it didn't, you don't HAVE to give consent to have your vehicle searched. Probable cause for searching a vehicle is very different from that of a home. Your acting nervous, or furtive, as interpreted by the cop gave him probable cause to search your vehicle. He did nothing wrong. Making you sit on the curb is not cruel, even at 54 degrees, much less 74. If you have some medical condition that makes the "brisk chill" at 74 degrees intolerable, you should carry a jacket at all times. Now, if it had been 34, and you were shirtless, that might be different. You could have complained about being cold--I am sure they would have gladly put you into the back seat of the patrol car. Second issue: the ticket. If you go to court and forgo all of the "I'm so wronged, I had to sit on the curb in the freezing cold" rhetoric, you could point out to the judge that nothing about a traffic infraction was mentioned. Explain that the reason they gave you for the stop was window tint, yet the ticket you actually received is for something they would have had to notice BEFORE stopping you. In other words, if the cop had said, "I'm stopping you for window tint violation", then your window tint "checks out", and ends up giving you a ticket for something else such as opened container ( something he couldn't have known BEFORE the stop) the discrepancy between the reason given and the ticket makes sense. But, not stopping at the white line is something he would have noticed before stopping you. However, the police do not have to give you a reason for stopping you--for arresting or detaining you, yes, but stopping you? No. Not sure you'd win in court, but its worth a shot. I would skip over the other nonsense posted about being cold, etc. It makes any merit you have regarding the ticket seem silly. Don't cloud the issue--the ticket---with irrelevant details, such as you don't like sitting outside without a shirt on. Also, at times, acting TOO cautious, over exaggerating stopping and the such is an indication that something is wrong. Trying hard NOT to get stopped can raise suspicion as well. Bottom line (notice--I don't expect a copyright for a common phrase dozens of people use in this forum):The police did nothing wrong. Your position is you did nothing wrong. Go to court, contest the ticket, but don't go with the presumption that the police did anything wrong in stopping you. Doing so detracts from the legitimacy of your position that the ticket wasn't justified.
|
|
09-03-2007, 08:38 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Do yourself a tremendous favour: Clean yourself up (shirts are required,) and show up on the appointed date and time with the facts in hand. Facts only; no personal details; the weather and your personal wardrobe choice are irrelevant to the court. If you have proof your window tint is within legal limits, I'd bring that as well. (That shows you're prepared.) Indicate to the judge that no reason was disclosed at any time during the traffic stop and simply list the facts as they happened. I'd also clearly indicate your willingness to cooperate as well (yes, you DID consent to the search) and tell the judge that after approximately a half hour or so, you were finally informed of the reason for the stop when the officer presented the citation to you. (If in fact that was the case.) I agree with you in that I believe the reason should've been disclosed at some point during the stop, after both you and your vehicle were checked and cleared, assuming there were no prior outstanding tickets, etc. Just out of curiosity here, did you ask at any point why you'd been stopped? You have a 50/50 chance that the officer will appear in court. (It's a minor traffic ticket and he/she may not even show up.) Regardless, if you present the circumstances as you recall them, (without elaboration) have a good previous driving record and show respect to the court while presenting your case, I think you have a pretty good chance at having the ticket dismissed. (Accepting your post at face value.) Strictly, an opinion here; not legal advice. That's not "beating" the ticket; that's contesting it. You have a right to do so. FYI: depending on your jurisdiction, some city courts have clerks to check you in and advise you of your options there. For example, your jurisdiction may allow you to plead "no contest," pay court costs and have a 60 day probationary period that'll allow the ticket to be dropped/expunged from your record after no further infractions. (An example only.) If you're not sure, you can always contact your traffic court ahead of time and find out what their standard procedure is. At least you're prepared ahead of time. Good luck.
|
|
09-03-2007, 10:23 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I am not even going to try to guess how the posters making a quick trip to the gas station without his shirt on remotely suggests he isn't intelligent enough to know to actually wear CLOTHES when he goes to court, nor do I understand how NOT wearing a shirt to the gas station suggests uncleanliness.
But, I digress....The legal difference between arrested, detained, and stopped is the difference between being told why you were being stopped and not being told. A traffic stop is just that. A stop. You are NOT under arrest. What you believe or think the cops SHOULD have done is irrelevant. Until they actually issue you the ticket, they are not , as a matter of law, required to give you a reason for stopping you. In my opinion, asking why you were stopped is extraneous, since, obviously, if they wanted you to know, they would have told you and will , in fact, inform you of the reason in due time. Of course, this answer is not from a personal experience point of view--since I have never received a ticket, nor have I gone to traffic court on my own behalf. I'm merely telling you what the law is regarding what an officer is, by LAW ( not opinion or preference) required or not required to do. Maybe you could get a transcript of -----(voice trailing off)...Um, nebbermind. Don't forget to wash behind your ears. Last edited by GentleGrace : 09-03-2007 at 10:32 AM.
|
|
09-03-2007, 05:05 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
When I get out of bed..I wear whatever I want to. Driving without a shirt isn't a problem.
I asked the 2nd officer why it was all happening and he didn't really know. He said maybe it was a traffic law I broke... Should I go with "not guilty" and "no contest?" Going not guilty will make more sense since I didn't brake any laws.
|
|
09-03-2007, 06:09 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
You cannot plead "not guilty" AND "no contest"--the two are opposite. Not guilty means you do not feel you have done anything to warrant the ticket. No contest means you do not dispute that the ticket is correct. I would go to court and plead not guilty and explain why--keeping in mind that the police do not have to inform you of WHY they are stopping you. If you acknowledge that fact to the judge, but point out it would have been a nice courtesy if they had told you, especially since you were left sitting ( literally ) for an appreciable period of time, he may see "your point" more than if you go to court acting as though you were ENTITLED to an explanation. I would plead not guilty and explain why you feel you did nothing wrong.
|
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Marketing for Attorneys |
Websites for Attorneys |
Law Firm Financing
LegalMatch Reviews |
LegalMatch Forums |
LegalMatch Family Lawyers |
LegalMatch PR
LegalMatch in Austin |
LegalMatch Life |
LegalMatch Affiliate Program
Linear Mode
