Sigon
+1y
Originally posted by WestCoast Sdime
devin your turning this into search and seizure, this is different. Were talking about checking your vehicle for any other vehicle violations. 4th admendment does not protect you from a cop wanting to inspect your vehicle for vehicle code offenses. Search and seizure protects you from inpractical searches that result in arrests or seizures. Just call your chp office,say hey id like to ask an officer about a ticket, and say hey, if i get pulled over,and he wants to check under my hood for intake or smog devices, can i refuse? And let it goto rest,thats what i was told right now,and im pretty sure they taught us that when we learned vehicle code law.
And im also pretty sure but not 100% sure,if CHP were to say,hey roll your window up im checking if its tinted,its 60 degrees, and your driving around at night with them down,that is suspicious to me that you are hiding something,you have to pick them up. Because when you are being detained you are not free to leave,therefore you have to comply with an officers commands,unless it is inpractical. You are however free to leave when the officers suspicions are confirmed and he has nothing else to talk to you about. of course the officer has to articulate why and what peaked his suspicion about you.
First off let me state and I love having discussions like this because the law is not black and white and things are most of the time not clearly defined. That is why attorney's and judges get paid so much money, to exploit those gray areas. But anyways...
Todd, clearly the 4th Amendment (applied using the 14th Amendment of course) do not state whether a search has to include a seizure of some kind. In fact, the 4th Amendment does apply in this case because if your vehicle was found to be a danger upon public highways your vehicle could be impounded. Therefore it does apply, now whether this has ever been tested in Court is another story. See just because something is a state or local law, does not mean that it holds any weight on appeals but that is a lengthy proccess I would not waste me time fighting, probably the same reason no one else has brought it up.
Now, as for the codes you stated.
Originally posted by WestCoast Sdime
2804: a member of the chp upon reaosnable belief that any vehicle is being operated in violation of any provisions of this code or is in such unsafe condition as to endanger any person, may require the driver of the vehicle to stop and submit to an inspection of the vehicle, and its equipment, license plates and registration card.
2806; Any regularly employed and salaried police officer or deputy sheriff, or any reserve police officer or reserve deputy sheriff listed in Section 830.6 of the Penal Code, having reasonable cause to believe that any vehicle or combination of vehicles is not equipped as required by this code or is in any unsafe condition as to endanger any person, may require the driver to stop and submit the vehicle or combination of vehicles to an inspection and those tests as may be appropriate to determine the safety to persons and compliance with the code.
2800. (a) It is unlawful to willfully fail or refuse to comply with any lawful order, signal, or direction of any peace officer, as defined in Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section 830) of Title 3 of Part 2 of the Penal Code, when that peace officer is in uniform and is performing duties under any of the provisions of this code, or to refuse to submit to any lawful inspection under this code.
2804- clearly states the term "reasonable belief" and it does not state that that the officer may stop for vehicle infractions. It says for "being operated in violation of any provisions of this code" that means you have to read the whole code.
Are you aware that in the great state of California you have is unlawful for a non-licensed person to transport inedible kitchen grease. (Sections 2460-247 Now according to that code number you cited it would give the officer jurisdiction to stop someone and check for that.
I think the way that law would be interpreted would be that you can be stopped for an inspection (brake and light check). I know most of you will probably say it is not related, but you have to realize that officers have guidelines they must work off of and do not have the ability to say well it works in this case and not in this one, that is the judge's job to do.
Look what I found31608. The inspection of a vehicle required under subdivision (b) of Section 31607 shall include inspection of the following:
(a) Brakes and the brake system.
(b) The ignition and lighting systems.
(c) All tires on the equipment.
(d) All supplemental equipment as required by Section 31610.
That clearly states what is involved with a vehicle inspection. That is what is deemed a "safe vehicle" and although found in the explosive section of the vehicle code, it clearly defines what is included with a CHP Vehicle Inspection.
I still want to thank Todd and Bagged Belair for their time because it's only through discussions like this that "we" as citizens can protect ourselves against the bad apples who do want to flex more power than others. Like I said, I have never had a problem with cops because I know what is illegal.