[popcorn31]

My question involves police conduct in the State of: Michigan

A friend of mine and I got pulled over in Dearborn, my friend was driving. The officer asked for my friend's license, and then I asked if he needed mine and he said sure. Not even 30 seconds later he asked my friend to step out of the car, and he said he was going to detain him and put him in handcuffs until he found out what was wrong with his license because he gave him his ID since he still has his temporary operators license. Another cop pulled up a minute later, asked me to step out of the car, searched me, didn't ask if he could, and then also detained me, but without handcuffs.

We were in the car for anywhere between 35 minutes and 40 minutes. I know the exact time we were released (3:05), and the exact time the ticket was written (2:42), but am not sure of the time when we were detained. The cop searched the car, called another 2 cars, they searched, talked for about 3-5 minutes, and then the sergeant asked us both individually some questions. So all that makes me sure it was more than a half hour.

Officer asked my friend if there was any kinds of drugs or weapons in the car, he said the only big things he had in his car was a subwoofer that wasn't hooked up, and a police scanner that did not have batteries in them, the antenna was disconnected, and it was set to the weather station.

The officer then searched his car, without permission, and seized the scanner, and issued him a ticket for it.

Before releasing me, the cop told me that he pulled us over for a reason and it was because they were looking for a dark SUV and our vehicle fit the description, it was involved in 3 burglaries within 10 minutes.

Now, here are my questions. An officer can only detain someone for a maximum of a 30 minutes, correct? And, is having a police scanner probable cause for a search? Keep in mind the scanner has no batteries, off, and the antenna is out.

Another thing I need to mention is that the officer wrote him a ticket for driving without an operator's license when the officer had it in his hands, my friend put it in a plastic bag to keep his fingerprints on it when he goes to court.

[aardvarc]

My question involves police conduct in the State of: Michigan

A friend of mine and I got pulled over in Dearborn, my friend was driving. The officer asked for my friend's license, and then I asked if he needed mine and he said sure. Not even 30 seconds later he asked my friend to step out of the car, and he said he was going to detain him and put him in handcuffs until he found out what was wrong with his license because he gave him his ID since he still has his temporary operators license. Another cop pulled up a minute later, asked me to step out of the car, searched me, didn't ask if he could, and then also detained me, but without handcuffs.

Until the officers could positively identify both of you, it makes sense from an officer safety standpoint to restrain/detain anyone whose ID is questionable for any reason, particularly in light of what the officer told you about your vehicle matching a wanted one. As far as the search, they are allowed to do a weapon pat down, which is different than an actual search like emptying your pockets (over simplified). Unless they found something on you and you want to supress the search, their search likely isn't an issue under these circumstances.

We were in the car for anywhere between 35 minutes and 40 minutes. I know the exact time we were released (3:05), and the exact time the ticket was written (2:42), but am not sure of the time when we were detained. The cop searched the car, called another 2 cars, they searched, talked for about 3-5 minutes, and then the sergeant asked us both individually some questions. So all that makes me sure it was more than a half hour.

Which may or may not have been reasonable. There's not a countdown clock beyond "reasonable" - and if they were trying to ascertain from the reporting agency additional info to determine if you were or weren't the guys they were looking for, that'll be an arguement your attorney can make in court. In my experience, 30 minutes (again, given the circumstances you describe) isn't agreegious - given that their choices were either a) let potentially dangerous suspects go in the interest of expediency, or b) arrest you on the spot and let the jail sort out your identities later (which would have caused issues for both you AND the officers). So in and of itself, 30 minutes wouldn't get my panties in a wad. Your attorney might believe otherwise and argue so, depending on their experience.

Officer asked my friend if there was any kinds of drugs or weapons in the car, he said the only big things he had in his car was a subwoofer that wasn't hooked up, and a police scanner that did not have batteries in them, the antenna was disconnected, and it was set to the weather station.

The officer then searched his car, without permission, and seized the scanner, and issued him a ticket for it.

Once you TELL an officer that you have contraband (such scanners are illegal to possess in a vehicle in a majority of states) in the car, probable cause is established and further permission to search isn't needed.

Before releasing me, the cop told me that he pulled us over for a reason and it was because they were looking for a dark SUV and our vehicle fit the description, it was involved in 3 burglaries within 10 minutes.

Now, here are my questions. An officer can only detain someone for a maximum of a 30 minutes, correct?

As noted, there's not a number - however it needs to fit into what would be argued to be "reasonable" under the total circumstances at the time.

And, is having a police scanner probable cause for a search? Keep in mind the scanner has no batteries, off, and the antenna is out.

If use or possession of such scanners is regulated or guided by statute or licensing requirements (certified HAM license holders and similar persons can often have special priviledges), and using or possessing one is prohobited, then yes, that's PC for the search if you admit to having one in the vehicle. Officers do get to check out such items to evaluate their condition as operable or not (and usually it being broken doesn't protect you).

Another thing I need to mention is that the officer wrote him a ticket for driving without an operator's license when the officer had it in his hands, my friend put it in a plastic bag to keep his fingerprints on it when he goes to court.

Like he couldn't have put his fingerprints on it later? Pointless. The court isn't going to have forensic services mess with an ID. If the ID was in fact valid at the time that the ticket was written, all your friend needs is a printout of the DL office's license record showing the dates and types of license/ID and that part should be easy. He needs to make sure that the item in question was in fact valid on the date of the stop and that any restrictions in place for the temp license were followed (such as having a fully licensed driver along, etc.). If there is a statute number on the ticket the officer gave him, you can look up the exact infraction that the officer references, to help you determine if all the requirements that the officer wrote you for were really met. It might be found at:

http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?mcl-257-306


Or you can contact you local driver license office and ask them to check out the statute number from your ticket to determine exactly what the officer said was wrong with the license at the time. (Be sure to check this out before you go to court).

[popcorn31]

The officer did not tell us why we were stopped until after we were released.

He started with a pat down on me, and then began emptying everything out of my pockets.

[BOR]

Now, here are my questions. An officer can only detain someone for a maximum of a 30 minutes, correct?

Your state case law is probably a parallel of US law.

The United States Supreme Court has ruled there is no "bright line" time frame/limit for an investigative detention/investigatory stop.

To put a cap on such would hamper law enforcement.

It can reach a point where such prolonged detention turns into an arrest, yes.

Given the facts, 30 minutes, may seem a little long, but it is most probably a "reasonable" seizure, which the 4th AM mandates.

I have read case law from a 3 hour detention in an airport that was ruled permissable, however, such "specific and articulable" facts must be present for such a long detention when a person is not actually under arrest.

If memory serves me right, a case I read permitted a 1 1/2 hour investigative on scene/street detention, but the SC warned the facts had better warrant it.

I don't know if I can find that airport case or not, but in your case as outlined, it seems to be within the paramaters of the 4th AM, yes.

[popcorn31]

This is the law on radio scanners:

750.508 Equipping vehicle with radio able to receive signals on frequencies assigned for police or certain other purposes; violation; penalties; radar detectors not applicable.

Sec. 508.

(1) A person who has been convicted of 1 or more felonies during the preceding 5 years shall not carry or have in his or her possession a radio receiving set that will receive signals sent on a frequency assigned by the federal communications commission of the United States for police or other law enforcement, fire fighting, emergency medical, federal, state, or local corrections, or homeland security purposes. This subsection does not apply to a person who is licensed as an amateur radio operator by the federal communications commission. A person who violates this subsection is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for not more than 1 year or a fine of not more than $1,000.00, or both.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it looks to me that it would only be illegal to have a radio scanner if you are a convicted felon, which neither I or my friend are.

[kist]

Your state case law is probably a parallel of US law.

The United States Supreme Court has ruled there is no "bright line" time frame/limit for an investigative detention/investigatory stop.

To put a cap on such would hamper law enforcement.

It can reach a point where such prolonged detention turns into an arrest, yes.

Given the facts, 30 minutes, may seem a little long, but it is most probably a "reasonable" seizure, which the 4th AM mandates.

I have read case law from a 3 hour detention in an airport that was ruled permissable, however, such "specific and articulable" facts must be present for such a long detention when a person is not actually under arrest.

If memory serves me right, a case I read permitted a 1 1/2 hour investigative on scene/street detention, but the SC warned the facts had better warrant it.

I don't know if I can find that airport case or not, but in your case as outlined, it seems to be within the paramaters of the 4th AM, yes.

I remember reading something to the effect that 20 ( maybe 30) minutes was the longest police could detain you (the case concerned detaining people while waiting on a police dog)

[BOR]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it looks to me that it would only be illegal to have a radio scanner if you are a convicted felon, which neither I or my friend are.

If the officer's ONLY basis to search was that contraband was in the car and it only applies to felon's, than the search was unconstitutional, but in supposed "good faith".

You should be able to fight the citation based on that premise.

[BOR]

I remember reading something to the effect that 20 ( maybe 30) minutes was the longest police could detain you (the case concerned detaining people while waiting on a police dog)

I have been trying to find that airport case I referenced, but with no success.

It involved the detention of a woman who had swallowed drugs and they were waiting for her to pass them? I may have been mistaken about the 3 hour time frame, but it was above a 30 minute detention for sure.


State case law may be of similar import to the federal, but can be stricter as far as vehicle detentions.

In my state, our constitution forbids detaining a person to bring in a drug dog and or futher continue a detention to inquire, unless it is based on specific and articulable facts.

They can ask if the vehicle contains contraband, if the answer is NO, they can NOT be further detained without a reasonable suspicion the occupants do indeed have contraband in the car.

On the airport case researched, I found a case that cited a case of a permissable 84 minute detention of the defendant:

It also cites:

See also United States v. Frost, 999 F.2d 737, 742 (3d Cir. 1993) (upholding an 80-minute detention where delay in bringing a drug-sniffing dog to the airport was not due to officers' lack of diligence), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 1001 (1993). However, in the absence of probable cause, the Court found in Place that a 90-minute delay of a suspect's luggage in an airport was unreasonable where the delay was due to the officers' lack of diligence. The Court stated: ". . . we hold that the detention of respondent's luggage in this case went beyond the narrow authority possessed by police to detain briefly luggage reasonably suspected to contain narcotics." Place, 462 U.S. at 710 (emphasis added).


http://ca10.washburnlaw.edu/cases/2002/05/01-2044.htm


As I said, the SC has NOT proffered a "bright line" time to begin and end an investigative detention, as facts are different in every stop.

[BOR]

I have been trying to find that airport case I referenced, but with no success.

It involved the detention of a woman who had swallowed drugs and they were waiting for her to pass them? I may have been mistaken about the 3 hour time frame, but it was above a 30 minute detention for sure.

I was at the law library today looking up some law and came across the case I was thinking of, the "alimentary canal" case. I knew there was some odd title attached to it, but I could not remember it.

I was looking up 4th AM cases in the U.S. Reporter series, volume by volume. The cases are seperated in the back index by subject. As soon as I saw "alimentary canal", I knew that was the one I was thinking of.

She was held for 16 hours. I was way off on my detention time, but I knew it as a looong time.



http://supreme.justia.com/us/473/531/case.html

[aardvarc]

Criminal investigation in and of itself does NOT trigger Miranda. Neither does arrest.