Minor Caught With Open Alcohol After a Traffic Stop

[Coys]

My question involves criminal law for the state of: Illinois

Hello,

I was coming back home from a concert at about 2:45am on the 28th of December when i got pulled over for going 51 in a 45. When i saw the flashing lights i made a left turn into a parking lot so i could legally park my car instead of it being on the side of the street. Officer told me to get my license and registration out without even telling me what i got pulled over for. When he came back to the car he asked how much i had to drink throughout the night. At the time i figured i was sober so i said none at all. My entire group stopped drinking at 9:30pm. I do understand Illinois is zero tolerance. He told me to get out of the car and asked for disposable tubes for the breathalyzer over his radio. In the mean time we did the field sobriety test which i passed without a problem. At the point he figured there was no point for a breathalyzer.

However, since he smells alcohol in the car he said he has reasonable suspicion to search my car. I gave him consent, he asked if there is anything he should know about. I told him that when he opens my trunk there will be a gym bag on the right side with a bottle of unopened sealed vodka bottle. He searched my car came back with the bottle and said that was enough to take me to the station and told me to turn around and put my hands behind my back. He wrote me up for:
MIP
Zero tolerance
6 over the speed limit
Blue interior lights
Failing to stop immediately

I left the station at about 5:30am
This was my first offense and i was wondering what kind of consequences im looking at. Court is January 19th
Thanks for the help.

[donzoh1]

He doesn't have to tell you why he pulled you over.

If he had reasonable suspicion, why were you giving him consent? I guess you can if you want, but I wouldn't. From what you're saying, it's not reasonable that he smelled alcohol.

The fact that you knew about the sealed alcohol container may demonstrate MIP. Look at the statute.

[flyingron]

Cops are allowed to lie to you.
Everybody thinks they passed the FSTs. There's probably enough to get you on the Zero Tolerance even with out a PBT.

You've certainly managed to rack up enough charges to warrant getting at an attorney.

Zero Tolerance:
$250 fine (+costs) / 360 hours of community service (either or both)
30 day loss of license.
4 points.
$500 / year surcharge on your license for two years.

$125 fine for the speeding + 2 points

$128 for the blue lights

I'd need to know what the particulars of the Failure To Stop charge was (was it something like 257.xxx). There's no statute directly with that title I can fine and several that might apply. 750.479a might apply and that is a criminal citation with pretty nasty penalties.

You need local knowledge, Michigan courts are all over the place with regard to what mitigation opportunities you might have. Some judges are soft, some are complete hard-posteriored persons of uncertain parentage.

[viol8te]

You say you're fom Illinois. What exactly are the violation codes on your tickets?

[flyingron]

Please ignore everything I said past the line about getting an attorney. I don't know where I got it in my head you were in Michigan and none of the rest of it has any applicability to Illinois.

[PADriver13]

He doesn't have to tell you why he pulled you over.

Incorrect. In order to be involuntarily stopped by the police, the police must have a reason to stop you. And they must articulate that reason when asked. First words out of my mouth when an officer approaches my car when I'm stopped are "why did you pull me over, officer?"

[viol8te]

I was coming back home from a concert at about 2:45am on the 28th of December when i got pulled over for going 51 in a 45.

Seems as if he told you what you were pulled over for right there?

[flyingron]

Incorrect. In order to be involuntarily stopped by the police, the police must have a reason to stop you. And they must articulate that reason when asked. First words out of my mouth when an officer approaches my car when I'm stopped are "why did you pull me over, officer?"

Negative. They must have an articulable reason but there's no requirement they give that reason to the stopped person. Articulable here means they have to be able to explain their reasoning rather than just saying they had a hunch or that the guy looked suspicious.

Some departments have a policy (mostly for PR purposes) to explain why they're making a stop at the time, but I know of no statute or decision that actually makes it mandatory

[cdwjava]

Incorrect. In order to be involuntarily stopped by the police, the police must have a reason to stop you. And they must articulate that reason when asked. First words out of my mouth when an officer approaches my car when I'm stopped are "why did you pull me over, officer?"

Who on Earth told you that the police have to tell you why they pulled you over?

Can you cite some PA law that requires this? It's certainly not the law everywhere - and I doubt that it is in PA, either. But, some states might have some peculiar standards.

When I am asked that question I most often respond with, "License, registration and insurance, please." And, maybe, "I'll speak to you about the reason for the stop after I have received those items from you." That way I can advise the driver why I made the stop and then excuse myself and walk away back to my patrol vehicle if he wants to argue about it.