Posted on 05/31/2011 6:29:14 AM PDT by marktwain
New Mexico Supreme CourtPolice officers in New Mexico can take guns away from drivers who pose no threat. The state supreme court ruled on May 20 that "officer safety" is more important than any constitutional rights a gun-owning motorist might have. The ruling was handed down in deciding the fate of Gregory Ketelson who was a passenger in a vehicle pulled over on November 13, 2008.
During the stop, Hobbs Police Officer Miroslava Bleau saw a 9mm handgun on the back seat floorboard. Ketelson and the driver of the car were ordered out and away from the car while Officer Shane Blevins grabbed the gun. The officers later learned that Ketelson, as a convicted felon, could not legally possess a firearm. The court, however, only considered whether the officers acted properly in taking the gun before they had any reason to suspect Ketelson, who was entirely cooperative during the encounter, of committing a crime.
Ketelson and the National Rifle Association argued that even a brief seizure of a firearm without cause violates fundamental, constitutionally protected rights. Ketelson also argued the gun could not have been taken without a search warrant, consent or exigent circumstances. A district court and the court of appeals agreed with this reasoning. State prosecutors countered that anyone with a gun ought to be considered "armed and dangerous" and thus the gun could be seized at any time. The high court agreed with this line of reasoning.
"Neither the defendant nor the driver was restrained, and thus the risk that one of them would access the firearm was especially potent," Justice Petra Jimenez Maes wrote for the court. "Under such circumstances, Officer Blevins could constitutionally remove the firearm from the vehicle because he possessed a reasonable belief based on specific and articulable facts which warranted him in believing that defendant was armed and thus posed a serious and present danger to his safety."
Because a gun would only taken for the duration of the traffic stop, the court decided such seizures were reasonable.
"The retrieval of the gun from the vehicle during the limited context of the traffic stop was at most a minimal interference with the suspect's possessory interest," Maes wrote. "Our decision in this case, which addresses a temporary separation of a firearm from the occupants of a car during the duration of a traffic stop, does not depend on any requirement of particularized suspicion that an occupant is inclined to use the firearm improperly."
The decision overturned statements made in a previous ruling, New Mexico v. Garcia.
"It would be anomalous to treat the mere presence of a firearm in an automobile as supporting a reasonable suspicion that the occupants are inclined to harm an officer in the course of a routine traffic stop," the court held in 2005.
A copy of the decision is available in a 140k PDF file at the source link below.
Source: PDF File New Mexico v. Ketelson (Supreme Court of New Mexico, 5/20/2011)
This is also Michigan Law. You are required by law to inform the officer that you are permitted and are carrying during any contact, and that the officer may take control of the weapon for the duration of the interaction.
Well, looks like the cops needs to be treated in a similar fashion.
It’s a little hard to come down on the side of anyone who is driving around with a handgun laying on the floor in plain sight—especially when they are being pulled over by the police.
BINGO!
By this reasoning, you must also throw all your guns out the window of your house before letting them in when they come to your door...which another court says they can do randomly for no reason.
But hey, don’t forget to register them guns, hear?
Problem is, if NRA, Gura et al don’t get in gear and start pushing some MAJOR cases thru, we’ll have our rights defined by criminals attempting “Hail Mary” plays. _Heller_ and _McDonald_ were great ... now let’s get on with it and push the other obvious issues thru faster than 2 per decade.
did the guy get his gun back? the story implies, but doesn’t answer that question. the cops can have temporary custody of my weapon whilst they’re making sure I’m not a thug, but I want it back before they leave.
In AZ it seems to be up to the officer if he takes possession of your firearm during a traffic stop, it can go either way. What pisses me off is when they make you empty all your magazines, it’s a pain to be standing on the side of the road and refilling them.
i dont think there is anything wrong with the police getting custody of the gun during the interaction/searching as long as they return it when they see nothing wrong
the guy was a convicted felon so can not legally possess a firearm, so i doubt it was returned
I agree with you. If I’m a cop and I see a gun on the floor, which I believe it is not supposed to be, I’m going to be a little antsy. In my state even with CCW permit you are not allowed to display the weapon, even on your car seat.
I’ll probably get cursed for this, but, based on the amount of thuggery going on out there, if I were a cop I’d prefer to be safe than sorry.
Not all cops are bad. If you go by the videos that are flooding the internet you’d think we were living in a police state. I say, not yet we’re not.
I know a few cops here in town. They are level headed, won’t stop anyone unless they are just being plain stupid and reckless and causing possible harm to others. They won’t write you a ticket for going 10 miles over because they know that, in most cases, you’re talking half a weeks pay to cover the cost.
They are also for CCW.
Well, I’ve only been CCWing for the last 3 weeks, and I have yet to be pulled over for anything.
But, I drive like a Grandma.
I’ll let y’all know how it goes if it happens.
if I were a cop I’d prefer to be safe than sorry.
“the cops can have temporary custody of my weapon whilst they’re making sure I’m not a thug, but I want it back before they leave.”
Ya, good luck with that.
This is just more power for the police state. Whenever you hear “the children” or “officer safety” you know it’s ends with statists seizing more of your liberty. Local police are now at absolute odds with the people they are supposed to serve and unfortunately most have the mindset to match. Law enforcement has become nothing more than the intimidation arm of government.
“if I were a cop I’d prefer to be safe than sorry.
Yup! “Officer safety” being paramount is total B.S. FREEDOM is paramount. If you are a cop and can’t handle that then get another job.
He then said " Don't reload here, but, when you get down the road apiece. You ARE in Shreveport. I never told him about the 9mm at my knee tucked in the seat.
A cop has rights too. This isn’t about permanently seizing a gun, or searching for a suspected gun and taking it, but having the right to control the scene during a stop.
And I don’t know of ANY state that argues against that. Here in AZ, we can carry concealed without a license, but IF a cop asks about guns, we have to tell him, and he has the right to secure the gun for the duration of the stop.
‘Law enforcement has become nothing more than the intimidation arm of government.’
Yup.
Kinda sad for an Old Geezer such as I, who can remember when cops were our friends.
shoudl a cop sto me, he doesn’t know who I am or whether I’m dangerous or not. he can take my gun and put it in his cruiser for the duration of tha traffic stop. I think that’s reasonable. he also should return it to me at the end of the stop.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.