The Supreme Court Allows Arrests of All in Drug Stops (PoliceState)

AP ^ | Dec 15,2003 | GINA HOLLAND

[ask]

Court Allows Arrests of All in Drug Stops

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court issued a traffic warning Monday: Beware of whom you ride with. If drugs are found in a vehicle, all occupants can be arrested, the justices said in a unanimous decision.

It was a victory for Maryland and 20 other states that argued police frequently find drugs in traffic stops but no one in the vehicle claims them. The court gave officers the go-ahead to arrest everyone.

In a small space like a car, an officer could reasonably infer "a common enterprise" among a driver and passengers, the justices ruled.

The case stemmed from an incident in 1999, when police in the Baltimore suburbs pulled over a speeding car. A search revealed a roll of cash in the glove compartment and cocaine in an armrest in the back seat.

The driver and the two passengers denied having anything to do with the contraband, so all three men were arrested.

Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, writing for the court, said police had probable cause to suspect that the drugs belonged to any of the three, or all of them.

Lisa Kemler, a criminal defense attorney from Alexandria, Va., said the court seems to be saying: "know who your company is."

"How many times have you gotten a ride with a friend? Are you going to peer around in their glove compartment?" asked Kemler, who fears the ruling will lead to a police dragnet. "You could find probable cause to arrest everybody."

Michael Rushford, president of the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation, a pro-law enforcement group, said police can't be expected to sort out ownership of drugs or guns in the middle of a traffic stop.

"You certainly wouldn't let three people with Uzis in their car leave because no one would admit the uzis were theirs," he said.

Maryland's highest court had thrown out the conviction of a passenger in the car, Joseph Jermaine Pringle, on grounds that his arrest violated the Constitution's Fourth Amendment ban on unreasonable searches or seizures. The Supreme Court reversed that decision.

"Pringle's attempt to characterize this case as a guilt-by-associaton case is unavailing," Rehnquist wrote in the brief decision.

Pringle told police later that the drugs were his and that he had planned to swap them for sex or money at a party. His 10-year prison sentence will be reinstated.

The American Civil Liberties Union and National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers filed a brief supporting Pringle. Their lawyer said the ruling will sweep innocent passengers into criminal cases.

"There's nothing in this opinion to prevent a police officer from arresting a graduate student who is offered a ride home late at night from a party that she has attended with some fellow students," said Tracey Maclin, a Boston University law professor.

The court's rationale could be used in other police search cases, involving homes, Maclin said.

The ruling dealt with the discovery of drugs and cash, but it could apply to other contraband as well.

Supporting Maryland in the case were the Bush administration, along with Alabama, Alaska, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, and Puerto Rico.

The case is Maryland v. Pringle, 02-809.

---

On the Net:

Supreme Court: http://www.supremecourtus.gov/

[vpintheak]

Are police officers really that evil? Why is everyone so scared that a police officer (who by the way deal with this crap every day)can tell there is more going on than what the people are telling him. Arrest everyone, bring them in, look at the evidence, question the suspects, and then release the innocent people. Simple as that, there is no SCARY POLICE STATE. Bad things happen, good things happen, all we ever hear for the most part are the bad things. Cops are by far some of the best people you will ever meet.

[eastforker]

Yes I have.My son was driving with a friend as passenger.Stopped for speeding,friend put drugs between seat and door.Cop asked to searc, son said okay,cop finds drugs,friend denies,both go to jail.He didn't have money for bail,spent 6 months in jail then released without ch arges but still has arrest record.Tell me again arrest does not equal conviction.

[Itzlzha]

Arrests do not equal guilt, and usually arrests occur before proving guilt or innocence...

OK, but upon ALL occupants being "arrested", the car is impounded, any cash on ANY person is confiscated (And must be fought for to be returned!), and a passenger is , IM(not so)HO, illegaly detained for an offense that they did not commit!

Now, the back-seat passenger must retain a lawyer, and fight! If they're "LUCKY", they get off...but it seems the USSC 9 Nazgul are stacking the odds against!

[eastforker]

That depends all on the local chief.If the top cop is crooked so will the underlings most of the time.On the other hand if the top cop is not a crook and runs a tight ship,the underlings will emulate him.Not much differant than raising a family actually.

[weegee]

I saw the same thing on Cops where a young adult (not a teen) was busted for driving his brother's car. No drugs. No ticket for his driving.

A search of the car turned up a gun that he did not declare to the officer. The guy freaked out that it was there but he was charged with posession of the gun. The officer said that when he took control of the vehicle he should have checked it out.

This type of a landmark decision applies to much more than just "pot smokers". Tagging this as a War On Drugs thread does it a disservice.

So much for "privacy" in your bedroom, vehicle, or hotel room.

[eastforker]

That depends all on the local chief.If the top cop is crooked so will the underlings most of the time.On the other hand if the top cop is not a crook and runs a tight ship,the underlings will emulate him.Not much differant than raising a family actually.

[Indie]

In Dallas, we only took the admitted owner or the person closest to the contraband. Unless of course I was the only officer, and I felt that particular contraband shouldn't be contraband and I could tell the folks weren't real criminals, and as long as they didn't "ask" me to take them to jail by being s***heads...then I'd let them go.

[FrogMom]

There goes the 4th along with the 1st and 2nd.

[21st Century Man]

Sounds like it to me...of course most people will worship the state and it's power until there under the jack-boot.

That's the way it's always been and always will be...

[Skooz]

Provide evidence for your claim Provide evidence for your claim Provide evidence for your claim Provide evidence for your claim Provide evidence for your claim Provide evidence for your claim Provide evidence for your claim Provide evidence for your claim Provide evidence for your claim

[weegee]

Those arrests can sometimes be removed (for money) from your record for a costly and lengthy legal process. Most times those arrests (even when charges are dropped) remain on your record.

Some job applications will even ask if you have ever been arrested for a felony (convicted of... is a separate question they ask).

Police departments are now taking DNA samples to go with the fingerprints on file of all persons booked. These get run against long "unsolved cases" occassionally as a shot in the dark.

Heck, even persons getting a Texas Driver's License have to provide fingerprints (1 from each hand) these days (have had to for over 5 years).

[Blackyce]

So i...pull over to the side of the road
And i heard "Son do you know why i'm stoppin you for?"
Cause i'm young and i'm black and my hats real low
Do i look like a mind reader sir, i don't know
Am i under arrest or should i guess some mo?
"Well you was doin fifty five in a fifty four"
"License and registration and step out of the car"
"Are you carryin a weapon on you i know alot of you are"
I ain't steppin out of sh** all of my papers legit
"Do you mind if i look round the car a little bit?"
Well my glove compartment is locked so is the trunk and the back
And i know my rights so you gon' need a warrant for that
"Aren't you sharp as a tack, are you some type of lawyer or something?"
"Or somebody important or somethin?"
Nah i ain't pass the bar but i know a little bit
Enough that you won't illegally search my sh**
"Well we'll see how smart you are when the K-9's come"

Who said there wasnt any wisdom in rap lyrics? People, please, DO NOT GIVE PERMISSION TO LET THE POLICE SEARCH YOUR CAR, even if you have nothing to hide at all. You dont know what others might have left there. Even if the Police believe they have probable cause and search anyway, you have strong grounds to fight any evidence in court if you explicitly deny consent.

[Lazamataz]

Why were the police doing such a thorough search for a speeding ticket?

They were looking for more evidence of speeding in the armrest of the seat.

[Lazamataz]

It works the other way, too....I drive taxi on the weekends. Do I have to search my fares for drugs now?

You'll need to install a police-like shield between you and the passenger. This will allow you plausible deniability.

Of course, they still might forfeit your cab. You've always been in jeopardy of that.

[MissAmericanPie]

I had no idea. I think this is best left the the disgression of the arresting officer, instead of making it mandatory. How do you feel about it?

[EuroFrog]

This doesnt bother me at all since me and my husband are the only ones that ever drive our car and rarely if ever does another person outside of my family get in the car and its usually a friend on our way to our church ladies group.

[cajun-jack]

any time you are stopped for any reason, immediately pull your keys, step out and lock your door.

[DLfromthedesert]

Wouldn't it be assumedn that the driver is reponoskible for what is in the glove compartment?

[21st Century Man]

You forgot to mention taking your registration with you...

[Hardastarboard]

Thanks to this ruling, we can all have the experience of DWB (driving while black). No matter your heritage or race.