Searched After a Traffic Stop for Driving a Moped While Standing

[souperdave]

Thanx for providing evidence as to why your attorney is not talking to you. Misrepresentation and diverting off into some sort of a rant tangent is quite the obvious tell.

[cdwjava]

you kno what this does not really matter anyway, i am asking and basing this question on that i am a free and sovereign man...... i am not how ever..... if this makes a difference to you read this article, send it to all your friends and then have them send it to all there friends. we can be free from the federal banking system and this corporation, we are not company employees.

www.commonlawgrandjury.com/who-is-working.htm

Fascinating ... but, your issue has nothing to do with banking or corporations. You failed to take advantage of the due process available to you - that's your problem. Sorry.

[PTPD22]

Ah…the misguided and misinforming “Sovereign Citizen” brigade rises from the murky swamp yet again. To paraphrase P.T. Barnum – There’s a moron born every minute!

[neal82]

ok, i can see why you would say that.... that is not how i intended to come across..... my question of the legality of the traffic stop is pretty direct.. the reason for the encounter with the officer is solely based on what i wrote at the top. it says nothing of standing on seat, it says nothing of a traffic infraction, it says nothing of a report of a man on a scooter robbin and stealin. i was just looking for someone to read that little paragraph and comment on it.... just the facts.... that is what they are going to do at court. why would i talk to my attorney like that anyway? that is not smart to sound like some ruby ridge, branch dividian, george jones character... i have not had a conversastion with her at all about my case except for me asking how we are going to approach my case. my case is a felony, so at the least she should have asked for a grand jury to see if i should be in court.... then if they said yes..... at the least she should have found something to suppress at the hearing..... if you would like to be of help to me read the paragraph and judge the legality of the stop.... thanks for talking.... i really appreciate the interaction with you.... you guys should read what Louise T McFadden had to say on june 10 1932, he was a member of the house of representitives, from the state of pennsylvania.... house pages 1295,1296.... enjoy

[PTPD22]

Ok, against my better judgment, I’ll accept you claim that, in spite of your transparency, you do not avow the ideals of the sovereign citizen idiots. So, with information solely provided in your original post…

Your post title says: “Searched After a Traffic Stop for Driving a Moped While Standing.” So, gee, I kinda got the funny idea that you were asking a question about the legality of a police search...presumably a search that occurred sometime during a contact with police that originated with you being the subject of a traffic stop for “driving a moped while standing!” Now, you claim that you were not standing. Ok, do over and we will accept that you misspoke.

So, what I believe you are asking (even though your original post didn’t actually include a question), is whether the search (that also wasn’t mentioned in your original post except in the title) can be suppressed as “fruit of the poisonous tree” because the officer had insufficient reasonable suspicion to make the initial traffic stop. If you can get a ruling that the officer did not have legal reason to make the stop, then everything discovered after (my presumption is drugs discovered during the only hinted-at search) is inadmissible to be used as evidence against you.

Now, presuming that is the basics of your inquiry, we have to look at the officer’s statement regarding why he stopped you. The officer says: 1) you were standing on your moped (you argue that you were not standing “on the seat” but rather “on the deck” – whatever, you were not seated in a fashion with which the moped is designed to be operated), 2) you were also carrying “baggage” on the moped (I’ve never seen a moped with a luggage rack. So, I have to assume this “baggage” was being carried in locations that are not designed to carry cargo), and 3) it appeared you did not have room to properly position your legs and feet. Now, I understand that, unlike a motorcycle, a moped does not have foot operated controls like brakes or gear shifter. But, regardless, it does have designed locations for you to safely put your feet. Nonetheless, the officer’s description sure does make it sound like both your perch on the bike and your ability to control the bike were rather precarious (at a minimum).

You state that there is no statute prohibiting operation of a moped while standing. As I’ve already stated, I don’t doubt you are correct on that point. However, a brief Google search tells me that Missouri law does say that operators of a moped on a public roadway is subject to all traffic laws.

Section 304.012. says:

1. Every person operating a motor vehicle on the roads and highways of this state shall drive the vehicle in a careful and prudent manner and at a rate of speed so as not to endanger the property of another or the life or limb of any person and shall exercise the highest degree of care.
2. Any person who violates the provisions of this section is guilty of a class B misdemeanor, unless an accident is involved then it shall be a class A misdemeanor.

Since the officer articulated not one, not two, but three different ways that you were operating the moped in a manner other than the way it was designed to be operated, it is going to be pretty hard to argue that the officer didn’t have even a reasonable suspicion that you were not operating the vehicle “in a careful and prudent manner” or were exercising “the highest degree of care.” In fact, it would seem pretty clear that the officer had not only reasonable suspicion (which is all he needed to make the stop) that you were in violation of this section, but already had probable cause to charge you with violation of this section. In fact, it is SO clear that he had sufficient reason for the stop, that, as I said before, your attorney obviously saw that trying to argue the point would have been a waste of both your attorney’s and the court’s time. The chances of success were exactly zero. The chances of pissing off the judge and looking like a bumbling idiot were high.

That is my opinion “of the officer statment and the fact my public defender lawyer did not file a motion to suppress.”

[souperdave]

.........you guys should read what Louise T McFadden had to say on june 10 1932, he was a member of the house of representitives, from the state of pennsylvania.... house pages 1295,1296.... enjoy

I ain't gonna take the time to look at this, but it does pose an interesting interogatory......did Louise have a moped?

[Disagreeable]

I ain't gonna take the time to look at this, but it does pose an interesting interogatory......did Louise have a moped?

He really has me wondering if I can drive my pickup on cruise, steering with my feet, while I look out the sunroof.