Quote Quoting EMPaighton™
View Post
My question involves search and seizure law in the State of: California (CA)

I have a friend who was attending high school classes at a college campus. I've heard multiple things about the search laws in CA about college campus searches and high school searches for vehicles. Such as vehicles in high school parking lots are subject to search no matter what, does that apply to college campuses as well?

Anyway, onto the story. The campus police received an anonymous tip that my friend had illegal substances in his vehicle as well as possible weapons.

As he got into his car after class, a police officer (i believe it was a campus officer) pulled him over before he could leave the parking spot, came up to his window, and pointed out that his rear windows were tinted, which to my knowledge is not illegal, just the front windows are illegal. The officer points out he can see a baseball bat in the back seat, which we find very unlikely seeing as my friends body was in the way, and the back windows are tinted, i'm pretty sure there was no way he could see the bat.

The officer proceeded to read him his rights and place him under arrest, he sat in the back of the cop car for 3+ hours while they searched the vehicle.
Since he was placed under arrest BEFORE the search, the anonymous tip is irrelevant to having PC to search. Parking in a lot a school lot is not "automatic" constitutional authority to search any car they please.


They're trying to charge him with:
Possession of a deadly weapon
Possession of a deadly weapon on school grounds
Possession of narcotics on school grounds
Possession of a controlled substance
Possession of a controlled substance on school grounds

and Possession of a firearm on school grounds

I have a question regarding the charges as well.

Can they really duplicate each charge because it was on school grounds? or is it changed to possession on school grounds only, instead of each charge twice because it was on school grounds?
Under the Blockbuger rule, a SC case of the same name, IF a section provides an element the other does not, the state can charge all.

Example:

1. No person shall assault another.

2. No person shall assault another with a dangerous weapon.

You can commit 1 without 2, but if you commit 2, then you commit both.


Does the simple fact of him having windows tinted, and even if the officer had clear sight of the bat in the back would that give him enough reason to search the vehicle?

He has his arraignment on the 10th so any help would be greatly appreciated.
You said he was placed under arrest before the search. IF the arrest was not grounded in Probable Cause, then his attorney can move to suppress, under the Exlusionary rule. any contraband found.