Good point. However, there is also a real issue as to whether the officer violated the Supreme Court’s ruling in Rodriguez vs. U.S. prior to giving the “lawful order” to put out the cigarette. From what I saw on the video, the officer returns to the car, and only has to give her the warning he had written up. Instead, he engages her in conversation, asking why she is upset. At that point, he is unreasonably, extending the stop in violation of Rodriguez. This infraction occurs prior to giving a “lawful” order. So it seems to me Rodriguez comes into play first. I think there is a pretty clear Rodriguez violation. The second issue is whether the question “ would you please put out your cigarette?” is an actual “order” it is clearly phrased as a question, to solicit a response, and is said during a conversation which potentially violates Rodriguez. I agree that he has the right to order her to put out the cigarette, if it was an order and was given during his mission. Rodriguez is pretty clear, that an officer may not delay his mission during the traffic stop. He clearly, did this when he engaged her in casaul conversation prior to issuing his warning. All, in all it was really poorly handled by both parties. There is also the issue of why the officer makes no mention of the lawful order to put out the cigarette in his report or to his supervisor. This could arguably be because it was not a lawful order. In either case, interesting issues in this case.
You make some good points.
Although the cop may have had the
legal authority to order her to
douse the cigarette he has to also
know that everything he does and says
could be part of a court hearing.
If he doesn’t have a solid reason
for directing her to extinguish her
cigarette then the judge will have
his ass. Just because the cop CAN do
something it doesn’t mean he should.
I submit that he did not mention the
cigarette issue because he started thinking
that he could be on shaky ground.