Unlawful Traffic Stop

[RandyL3312]

My question involves a traffic ticket from the state of: California

A friend of mine was pulled over and was issued a ticket and got her car impounded for not driving without a license. She was not told the reason behind the stop by the officer and did not violate any traffic laws and her car did not violate any vehicle codes. However, she does have a prior record for driving without a license and we suspect the officer may have known this by pulling up her file from her license plate. Now, does having a prior record of not driving without a license constitute as reasonable cause for the officer to pull her over in the first place? Advice from anyone with similiar experiences or legal expertise is welcomed. Thanks.

[cdwjava]

A friend of mine was pulled over and was issued a ticket and got her car impounded for not driving without a license.

That can be filed as a misdemeanor criminal offense. Oops!

She was not told the reason behind the stop by the officer and did not violate any traffic laws and her car did not violate any vehicle codes.

If the officer did not say why he or she made the stop, then how do you know that no traffic law was violated??

As for the vehicle's equipment not being in violation, how can you be so sure? The Vehicle Code is a rather large tome.

However, she does have a prior record for driving without a license and we suspect the officer may have known this by pulling up her file from her license plate. Now, does having a prior record of not driving without a license constitute as reasonable cause for the officer to pull her over in the first place?

If the officer pulled her record up through dispatch or a computer in his vehicle and it indicated she was suspended, then he had plenty of reasonable suspicion to make the stop.

If your friend wants to hire an attorney and take the matter to trial, she can seek any reports or notes in discovery in an attempt to find out why she was stopped.

[flyingron]

They're not obliged to tell you why they stopped you. They are obliged to be able to articulate a reason that fits in the probable cause for the seizure when the prosecution proceeds. As CDW points out, with computers these days, the fact her license was suspended and she was in a car registered to her, may have been indeed all the cause he needed. It's also possible she violated some other minor aspect of the VC, but there's no point in pursuing a failure to signal violation when you've got someone dead nuts on for a misdemeanor.

I haven't been stopped by the police many times, but almost every time, I've been asked license and registration BEFORE they go into the reason for the stop.

[EWYLTJ]

Randy,

You may be 100% right, but you still have a losing argument in court. All the cop has to say is that she drifted over the yellow line, or was momentarily driving erratically. It would be almost impossible to prove there was not probable cause for the stop.

[cdwjava]

I haven't been stopped by the police many times, but almost every time, I've been asked license and registration BEFORE they go into the reason for the stop.

The training in this regard is very similar nationwide, even if it is not always universally practiced. The standard is that you obtain the necessary documents BEFORE you advise of the reason for the stop. That way, in case the driver wants to argue, you can simply excuse yourself and walk back to your car and write the cite (if so inclined) instead of engaging in what may be a fruitless argument.

[RandyL3312]

Would the fact that the ticket that was issued to her did not have any notes indicating any other violations other than the driving without the license suffice as evidence that there was no other violations? If she did violate other laws, why didn't the officer enforce it, or at least make a note of any violations.

They're not obliged to tell you why they stopped you. They are obliged to be able to articulate a reason that fits in the probable cause for the seizure when the prosecution proceeds. As CDW points out, with computers these days, the fact her license was suspended and she was in a car registered to her, may have been indeed all the cause he needed. It's also possible she violated some other minor aspect of the VC, but there's no point in pursuing a failure to signal violation when you've got someone dead nuts on for a misdemeanor.

I haven't been stopped by the police many times, but almost every time, I've been asked license and registration BEFORE they go into the reason for the stop.

If cops have so much credibility over any citizen, it appears that any law abiding citizen walking down the street could get stopped and patted down and the officer could simply make up a false pretense for doing so; e.g. he was disturbing the peace or acting erratically or littering.

I agree with you that the cop could simply make up a scenario in which my friend had some moving violations while driving or her car may have in fact violated some vehicle codes. Supposed she did violate some vehicle codes, wouldnt the cop have to know what it is when in fact the ticket that was issued to her does not indicate any other violations besides the driving without a license. The fact of the matter is that she used to have a license from another state but was unable to renewal it for legal issues, so techincally she did not have a suspended license just not a license at all from a prior time, which in my view, does not give probable cause for the officer to believe she currently does not have a license. Anlogously, supposed a person has prior conviction of harboring a meth lab does that mean the officer have probable cause to search his home without consent, just because he had this prior conviction?

We're hoping by the time this goes to trial, after all the court date postponements, the cop wont remember why my friend was pulled over or remember her car enough to make up some vehicle violation

[cdwjava]

Would the fact that the ticket that was issued to her did not have any notes indicating any other violations other than the driving without the license suffice as evidence that there was no other violations? If she did violate other laws, why didn't the officer enforce it, or at least make a note of any violations.

Because there is no legal requirement to cite for lesser offenses - or ANY offenses.

If it goes to trial, the officer will almost certainly have to articulate the reasonable suspicion for the detention (the stop).

The fact of the matter is that she used to have a license from another state but was unable to renewal it for legal issues, so techincally she did not have a suspended license just not a license at all from a prior time, which in my view, does not give probable cause for the officer to believe she currently does not have a license.

Sure it does. No valid license anywhere is a potential misdemeanor in CA. If you run the name and no license comes up, and the person cannot supply any proof r info about a valid license anywhere, then what is the officer supposed to do?

What code section was she cited for? CVC 12500(a)?

We're hoping by the time this goes to trial, after all the court date postponements, the cop wont remember why my friend was pulled over or remember her car enough to make up some vehicle violation

What makes you think that? The officer likely has notes on his cite. Or, he may have a good solid recollection of such things. If he can't recall the details, then she might be able to prevail at court if the officer lacks independent recollection ... only time will tell.