Seems like it a big gray area, this says both ways are right
http://www.legalzoom.com/us-law/priv...-police-search
The Supreme Court ruled in Knowles v. Iowa that police cannot search a driver or passengers after ticketing them for routine traffic violations. In its decision, the Court said that a traffic violation is not an "arrest." Police officers' ability to conduct searches is limited so you would not be in their custody. The probable cause argument is also diluted in this case. Ticketing you for turning right at a red light does not give an officer probable cause to search you or your car. Traffic violations are not inherently connected to any other criminal activity. This voids a claim of "reasonable suspicion" on the officer's part.Another point on law enforcement's side is that cars are generally excepted from the advance warrant requirement because of their mobile nature. This gives them license to conduct warrantless searches of cars. An officer only has to meet the probable cause standard in most instances. This is relatively easy to do. Proving that an officer did not have probable cause is much more difficult and has only succeeded in a few cases. Most of those cases have involved racial profiling of some type, lack of consent, or a small exception in the public's favor...traffic violations.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by thelancinator
I souldn't have said anything
