Part of what makes getting pulled over by the police stressful is that law enforcement officers sometimes use traffic stops as the first step toward ultimately searching you and/or your vehicle. If the police didn’t have a warrant and didn’t get permission from you to conduct the search, it’s possible that the search they performed violated your constitutional rights. If so, you’re entitled to seek the suppression of the evidence in your criminal case. This evidence isn’t automatically suppressed, however. Instead, you need to make a properly timed and well-stated motion for suppression, which is one of the many areas where the services of a skilled Santa Barbara criminal defense lawyer can be vitally important.
One of the ways the police sometimes violate your Fourth Amendment rights is by stretching out the duration of the stop beyond what’s necessary to deal with your traffic violation. A drug case that originated in Santa Clara County illustrates what we mean.
E.A. was a man driving in San Jose one evening when the police pulled him over. The man allegedly had briefly driven in the bicycle lane and failed to signal his right turn early enough.
The police took his license and registration and forwarded that info to a dispatcher. Roughly 3.5 minutes into the stop, the police ordered the man out of his car and began asking him a string of questions. They eventually asked him for permission to search his car, which he refused. (You’re within your rights to refuse consent and it’s potentially in your best interest to say “no” even if you know your vehicle is free of potentially incriminating materials.) At this point, six minutes had elapsed since the police first pulled the man over.
The police conducted field sobriety tests: an eye examination using a flashlight and a check of the man’s pulse. By the time the man satisfactorily completed those tests, just under 10 minutes had elapsed.
Eventually, more than five minutes after the conclusion of the field sobriety tests, a narcotics dog “alerted” on the man’s car. The police extensively searched the vehicle, ultimately finding cocaine and methamphetamine.
What the police did in this case, according to the Court of Appeal, was to illegally prolong the stop. The law requires the police to “diligently” pursue their investigation of the infractions for which they pulled you over and, once those matters are resolved, release you on your way. Typically, this involves checking to ensure your driver’s license is not suspended, assessing the validity of your vehicle registration and proof of insurance, making sure you have no outstanding warrants, and then giving you a citation.
In E.A.’s case, the police had, within the first 3.5 minutes, confirmed the validity of his license, registration, and insurance, and determined that he had no outstanding warrants. However, for the next 12 minutes, no officer took any steps toward writing a citation.
That timeline — established by the uncontroverted video evidence — was enough to show that the police stretched the stop longer than was necessary to address the traffic violations the driver allegedly committed. The appeals court agreed with the man’s counsel’s arguments that by engaging in these delays, the police violated the driver’s Fourth Amendment rights, making their eventual search of the vehicle illegal and the drug evidence inadmissible.
If you’re facing charges stemming from a warrantless search, it’s possible that the search violated your Fourth Amendment rights. At The Law Offices of Tristan Verburgt, our team is committed to providing clients with powerful advocacy and effective strategies to defend against the charges they’re facing. Attorney Verburgt had handled thousands of criminal cases, including both felony and misdemeanor matters. To put the power of a skilled and experienced Santa Barbara criminal defense attorney to work for you, contact us online or call (805) 220-3923.
by Ohava