High Court: Police May Search Parked Cars

ANNE GEARAN

Associated Press


WASHINGTON - Police can search a parked car for drugs, guns or other evidence of a crime while arresting a driver or passengers nearby, the Supreme Court ruled Monday.

The high court has already ruled that officers can search a car when arresting someone inside, and the same rule now applies if a motorist or passenger gets out of the car.

The 7-2 ruling addressed a common situation, in which police pull over a suspicious car or come upon it while it is parked. Sometimes motorists get out of the car before an officer approaches, and it was not clear until now whether police had leeway to search the car.

"In all relevant aspects, the arrest of a suspect who is next to a vehicle presents identical concerns regarding officer safety and the destruction of evidence as the arrest of one who is inside the vehicle," Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist wrote.

more: http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/politics/8748105.htm

Not sure from the article. Legally, however (and I'm no lawyer), I wonder just what the difference is between a car parked on the street and the occupant three miles away and the car and occupant 500 yards from each other.

In other words, does this Judicial Arm of the Coup "ruling" now mean cops can just pop the door of any parked car they see now, having only to invent the usual cop bullshit justifications for whatever it was they did?

If that's the case, we're fucked.

The search of the interior of the car is based on the idea that there are dangerous things within the grab area of the passengers of the car, so the police should be able to look for them. Basically, it's the same thing as a pat down, but the logic is stretched, because if the police have cuffed you, there's not much grabbing you're going to be able to do in the car.

Suspects who know their 4th A jurisprudence imediately jump out of the car when the police show up so that they can make the argument that they're no longer within the grab area of stuff inside their car.

Rehnquist seems to think that you can still reach back in your car, so the police should still be able to search the car.

So now, if you're going to be arrested and you know you have something in your car, walk far away from your car so that you can appeal up to the Supreme Court and argue that the car was nowhere near you, and then Rehnquist can issue a ruling that 100 yards is still within the grab area.

Six other justices agreed with him. Only two dissented.

eom.

that spray ink like fire alarms in schools?

or maybe it's more like a boa-constrictor, everytime you breath
it contracts a little more

if there were enough cops to watch everyone, how many of us would be in jail?

That, and the limitless appetitie for Tyranny and Totalitarianism that is evinced by the Imperial Family.

http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/24may20041045/www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/03pdf/03-5165.pdf

Not even close.

I wish we would complain as loudly as the 1st-amendment rkba nuts about how our right to privacy from government intrusion being so thoroughly obliterated in the continuing madness of the war on drugs.

Everyone please join and give to the ACLU. They're about the only ones fighting to protect what shred of privacy we have left.

I once worked for the police force, and some of the officers made the bad guys look good! Who can you trust nowdays? If "they" want to get you for/on something, they aren't above planting suspect evidence.
:shrug:

If the doors are locked it would be difficult for a suspect to lunge into the vehicle to grab a weapon or destroy evidence.

If the suspect was not seen in the vehicle and the doors are locked it would be wise to lose the keys.