Unlawful Performance of a Roadside Cavity Search by the Police

My question involves criminal law for the state of: New Mexico/Georgia/New York

I heard of a case in New Mexico where an unfortunate man was subjected to a "cavity search" by officers who suspected that he "hid something up his butt". Nothing was there. I have no idea why the police officers in this case actually WANTED to deal with such an examination with no evidence supporting it. If I were in their shoes, the LAST thing I'd want to do would be to "search" someone in this manner, and the mere thought disgusts me as it would most people. I read about this case from Business Insider. The man won a settlement case for this incident. I feel that the vast majority of police are not corrupt or abusing their power in any way, but if one were to be confronted with some sicko who tried to give a "lawful order" to search them in this manner........ I would not comply and would say that I want the "examination" to be done by a medical professional if they wished to perform such a "search". I'm a resident of Georgia at the moment, but I also spend time in NY. Anyways, this horrendous case had me wondering if refusing an order for this type of search that I heard in this case would lead to a charge of "resisting a lawful order" that could potentially stick. I am not anti-police, and I feel that most police are simply people doing a difficult and dangerous job and are worthy of great respect for doing so. However, if one of the bad apples were to attempt to do something as strange and disturbing as this....... could one be convicted for refusing an unlawful order such as this? I honestly think that most cops are doing their job and are protecting the people and doing a good job of it, but this case is utterly horrifying.

Uh ... wow ... we REALLY need to know some more details (including the state)! In general, a roadside "cavity search" is not going to be lawful absent some very serious and articulated exigencies! I cannot imagine ever needing to conduct one, though I imagine that such a circumstance might very well come up.

I cannot possibly explain why some officers do certain things. The law in my state is pretty darn clear on such things, and absent a court order, informed consent, or a dire exigency (preferably two or more!), we're not going to do such a thing.

Though a ROADSIDE cavity search is something different than one in a more controlled environment. Though, the law is still much the same.

(Note that the OP's original post contained NO information at all - only the prompt for the state. He subsequently added info in the edit.)

Quote:

---

Quoting Rock Knocker

---

The OP is probably refering to these, all in New Mexico
https://www.abqjournal.com/344755/ne...ity-search.htm
https://www.cnn.com/2014/01/16/justi...ent/index.html
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...y-search-case/

---

Exactly, it was this case.

I would think that the odds of you being struck by lightning is greater than the odds of you being stopped AND suspected of containing contraband up your rectum AND being order to drop trousers on the street.

The term covers a very broad category of searches, so not all of them will be conducted by medical personnel. The most common is a visual inspection which would not require medical personnel.

Quote:

---

Quoting Steve418

---

Exactly, it was this case.

---

One of the links doesn’t work and the other two were from two differenent situations so “it was this case” is incorrect. It may have been one of them but not all of them.

Okay. Four years ago an out of court settlement was reached on the incident that involved a detention of a suspect with priors for drug possession, a probable history of transporting drugs in an banal cavity, and a search warrant. The search may or may not have been without lawful grounds. Since no court apparently ruled on the matter, it is hard to say that anything untoward occurred - especially since no response from the county was provided in the story.

I'm not sure what your question here is. If it was whether or not you CAN be "convicted" for refusing a search based upon a search warrant, the answer is "Yes." You CAN be. Whether you would be, or not, depends on all the facts.

But, rest assured, the odds of this happening to you are probably slightly worse than hitting the winning lottery numbers.

EDIT: Hey! Where did the original reply go?? At 2 AM Steve418 had replied: "It was the one from CNN."