Yahoo Tuning Groups Ultimate Backup metatuning FW: Cal. Police Can Search Car for ID's

What do you all think?
Are warrantless searches justified?

------------------
State Court Backs Police on Searches

Rights: Justices split sharply in 4-3 ruling allowing
car inspections for license, registration.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-012502search.story

January 25, 2002
By MAURA DOLAN, Times Legal Affairs Writer

SAN FRANCISCO -- Police in California may search cars
if a driver fails to produce a license or registration
regardless of whether the officer has a warrant, the
state Supreme Court ruled Thursday.

The high court, in a 4-3 vote, sided in favor of law
enforcement despite sharply worded dissents declaring
that such searches violate the U.S. Constitution

Justice Joyce Kennard, one of the dissenters, suggested
the ruling may have been motivated by security fears
stemming from the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

"As this opinion is being written, our nation is
undergoing a painful recovery from the devastating
physical and psychological effects of that day,"
Kennard wrote. She said the ruling "does nothing to
enhance our security and does much to erode our 4th
Amendment rights."

California courts previously have allowed police making
routine traffic stops to search for licenses and
registrations in glove compartments and under visors.
The Supreme Court's decision Thursday approves for the
first time searches under the seats of cars and
elsewhere when there is no reason to believe a crime
has been committed, lawyers in the case said.

Other courts have also given police more freedom in
dealing with motorists. The U.S. Supreme Court earlier
this month reaffirmed that police have extensive leeway
in determining when to stop motorists and that they may
rely on innocent-looking actions as grounds for their
suspicions.

The state high court's majority, in an opinion written
by Chief Justice Ronald M. George, reasoned that police
can look for documents in a vehicle to determine the
identity of the driver and the owner of the vehicle.
The decision upheld two police searches in Orange and
Solano counties in which drugs were found under car
seats and the drivers were prosecuted for possession.

"Limited warrantless searches for required registration
and identification documentation are permissible,"
George wrote, when the officers look for documents "in
an area where such documents reasonably may be be
expected to be found."

George contended that allowing such searches would be
less intrusive than arresting a motorist for driving
without a license. He also noted that it would not be
permissible to search a car trunk unless the officer
had reason to believe the documentation was in there.

Voting with George were Justices Marvin Baxter, Ming W.
Chin and Justice Carlos R. Moreno, whom Gov. Gray Davis
recently appointed to fill a vacancy left by the death
of Justice Stanley Mosk in June. Mosk frequently sided
with defendants in police search cases.

The U.S. Supreme Court has never ruled in a case
involving the kind of circumstances before the
California court, although some high courts in other
states have upheld searches for vehicle registration.

The three dissenting justices sharply accused the
majority of violating the U.S. Constitution by creating
a "blanket" exception to warrant requirements.

Justice Kathryn Mickle Werdegar said the majority erred
in saying that the space beneath a driver's seat is a
reasonable place to keep vehicle registration. She also
noted that driver's licenses are not usually kept under
a car's seat and contended the Constitution prohibits
car searches for licenses.

"Nothing--not the Constitution, nor any statute nor the
cases cited by the majority--authorizes police to
conduct a warrantless vehicle search in an attempt to
discover the license of a driver who asserts he or she
does not have it in the car," Werdegar wrote.

If a driver fails to produce a license, the officer can
run the driver's name on a computer, ask the driver to
submit a thumbprint, accept another form of
identification or arrest the driver, she said.

"By what logic," she asked, "would a police officer
believe that searching a vehicle for a person's
driver's license would be fruitful when the driver has
just informed the officer that he does not have a
license in possession?"

Kennard, joined by Justice Janice Rogers Brown,
discussed "the horrendous events of Sept. 11" and asked
whether anyone would ever be able to forget them.

Part of the recovery has been to create more security
for citizens but "an equally important part" should be
a "rededication to the principles upon which our nation
was founded," Kennard wrote.

She predicted the ruling "may well result in limitless
searches throughout a vehicle whenever a driver cannot
produce the requisite documentation."

-[snip]-

🔗monz <joemonz@...>

> From: X. J. Scott <xjscott@...>
> To: metatuning <metatuning@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Friday, January 25, 2002 3:27 PM
> Subject: [metatuning] FW: Cal. Police Can Search Car for ID's
>
>

> What do you all think?
> Are warrantless searches justified?
>
> ------------------
> State Court Backs Police on Searches
>
> Rights: Justices split sharply in 4-3 ruling allowing
> car inspections for license, registration.
>
> http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-012502search.story
>
> January 25, 2002
> By MAURA DOLAN, Times Legal Affairs Writer
>
>
> SAN FRANCISCO -- Police in California may search cars
> if a driver fails to produce a license or registration
> regardless of whether the officer has a warrant, the
> state Supreme Court ruled Thursday.

Ah ... what a joy it is to live in such a Nazi state!

My biggest complaint about where I live is the police
helicopters hovering overhead 2 or 3 times a day.
Talk about an intrusive invasion of a composer's privacy ...

-monz

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @... address at http://mail.yahoo.com

🔗Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@...>

🔗peteysan@...

In a message dated 1/25/02 8:10:13 PM Pacific Standard Time,
joemonz@... writes:

> Ah ... what a joy it is to live in such a Nazi state!
>

They're making me completely crazy!

When I moved to Marin County several years ago I had long hair and a crummy
car, and it seemed like every time I looked in the rear view I was getting
pulled over. Once I got stopped--he said!--for driving without my headlights
on...at dusk!

It's terrifying to imagine the real reasons behind such rulings.

Imagine how terrifying it must be to be a competent and ethical defense
attorney these days...They're a joy to meet if you ever have the misfortune
to need one. One I met at a party said he could hardly stay in the game
anymore when mandatory sentencing meant that the best he could do for his
client was 25-to-life...Then he showed me pictures of his friends/clients in
jail, Ow!

Jeff, I'd love to hear _your_ opinion.

Pete

P.S. Monz, I don't know how to explain how I found that I missed the
helicopters when I got back to L.A. Just something I identified with the
place that I made home, I guess. Not that I didn't want to throw stones at
them, either...
Very weird.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

🔗monz <joemonz@...>

> From: <peteysan@...>
> To: <metatuning@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Friday, January 25, 2002 8:55 PM
> Subject: Re: [metatuning] FW: Cal. Police Can Search Car for ID's
>
> ...
>
> P.S. Monz, I don't know how to explain how I found that I missed the
> helicopters when I got back to L.A. Just something I identified with the
> place that I made home, I guess. Not that I didn't want to throw stones
at
> them, either...
> Very weird.

Yeah, I know what you mean. Don't get me wrong ... there's
a lot that I *do* like about living in California. But the
helicopter thing *really* drives me nuts. The main thing
I want to foster in my home is peace and quiet, and when
those damn things come roaring overhead it really iritates
the hell out of me.

Then there's the incessant noise from freeway traffic too ...
Oh well ... I know what you mean, because I never thought
I'd miss Philly as much as I do. (but I still don't ever
want to live there again either...)

But yes (keeping this post on the thread topic), one of the
biggest differences between Philadelphia and San Diego is
the incredible "in your face" aspect of the police presence
in California. It's not like that in Pennsylvania at all.
Of course, the good side of that coin is that one really
*does* feel safer here ... so you get the good with the bad.

But the increasing powers of the "peace officers", as they
call them here, is a real cause for alarm. The *very first
day* I was in San Diego, with Pennsylvania tags on my car,
I got pulled over by a cop, ostensibly because he wasn't sure
if I was operating my car legally with only the one license
plate (in the rear) that gets issued in Pennsylvania. At least
that's the question he put to me as an answer to my inquiry
as to why he stopped me. But of course, he had no way of
knowing that my car didn't have a license plate on the front
*until after* he stopped me and took a look. I'm convinced
that the real reason he pulled me over was because I looked
like a hippie and had a passenger who also looked like one.

-monz

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @... address at http://mail.yahoo.com

🔗X. J. Scott <xjscott@...>

Pete,

> Jeff, I'd love to hear _your_ opinion.

I'm with Monz on this one regarding the facism and
with the folks in the article pointing out that if the
driver says he doesn't have a license with him, that is
certainly not even probable cause to get a warrant,
MUCH less probable cause to do a warrant-LESS search.

I just don't get these arguments that warrantless
searches are EVER OK under the US Const. anyway.

The gov't is out of control.

I hope this *does* go to the USSup.Ct. -- I assume
they'd toss it out unanimously but if they'd didn't I'd
be interested to see what sort of hare-brained analysis
they'd come up with to justify it. Not surprised that
the Calif. judges upheld it - a majority of those
judges think they are gods anyway and do as they
please, the law be d*mned.

Calif. laws have always been 'progressive'
(totalitarian), but things took a turn for the worse
when the psycho fascist Dan Lundgren became attn'y
general and declared war on all who oppose him.

Of course the problem is not in Calif. but worldwide.

"The tree of liberty mush be refreshed with the blood
of tyrants and patriots."

- Jeff

🔗X. J. Scott <xjscott@...>

> when those damn things come roaring overhead it really
> iritates the hell out of me.

A coulpe years before you got to SD Monz, therce was a
fellow in Oceanside sick to death of the helicoptors
went out and shined his piddly little flashlight up at
the helicoptor.

The police commando unti was at his house within
minutes, hogtied him and tossed his *ss in jail for
attempted murder on the life of a helicoptor pilot.
Like, give me a break!

I don't remember what became of the guy but when the
public found out how much those helicoptors were raping
the police budget so they didn't have money left for
anything else, and were COMPLETELY ineffective in
finding real criminals, they were forced to get rid of
them.

That's your angle -- start talking to people about how
crime goes UP because the helicoptors take the budget
away from REAL police work just so some immature yahoos
can go for 'copter joy rides.

Look into the $$. You'll be surprised.

- Jeff

🔗X. J. Scott <xjscott@...>

> But yes (keeping this post on the thread topic), one of the
> biggest differences between Philadelphia and San Diego is
> the incredible "in your face" aspect of the police presence
> in California. It's not like that in Pennsylvania at all.
> Of course, the good side of that coin is that one really
> *does* feel safer here ... so you get the good with the bad.
>
> But the increasing powers of the "peace officers", as they
> call them here, is a real cause for alarm. The *very first
> day* I was in San Diego, with Pennsylvania tags on my car,
> I got pulled over by a cop, ostensibly because he wasn't sure
> if I was operating my car legally with only the one license
> plate (in the rear) that gets issued in Pennsylvania. At
> least
> that's the question he put to me as an answer to my inquiry
> as to why he stopped me. But of course, he had no way of
> knowing that my car didn't have a license plate on the front
> *until after* he stopped me and took a look. I'm convinced
> that the real reason he pulled me over was because I looked
> like a hippie and had a passenger who also looked like one.

Right - although there are certainly good people on the
force in Southern Calif., in SD there are an awful lot
of kooks, power freaks, and paranoid delusionaliacs.

I remember the cops investigating a friend of mine for
being the PB serial rapist -- who was identified by all
the victims who survived as a medium height black guy.
My friend was a scrawny white guy over 6 foot tall.

I've seen the cops don there go crazy on people and I
do not approve of the way they take out their
frustrations by whaling on homeless people. A lot of
the homeless in SD simply can't afford a place to live
& have jobs and families, but the cops have no sympathy
for them and are always getting on their *ss.

- Jeff

🔗monz <joemonz@...>

> From: X. J. Scott <xjscott@...>
> To: <metatuning@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2002 7:33 AM
> Subject: Re: [metatuning] FW: Cal. Police Can Search Car for ID's
>
>
> > when those damn things come roaring overhead it really
> > iritates the hell out of me.
>
> A coulpe years before you got to SD Monz, therce was a
> fellow in Oceanside sick to death of the helicoptors
> went out and shined his piddly little flashlight up at
> the helicoptor.
>
> The police commando unti was at his house within
> minutes, hogtied him and tossed his *ss in jail for
> attempted murder on the life of a helicoptor pilot.
> Like, give me a break!

Unfortunately, that sounds so typical.

> I don't remember what became of the guy but when the
> public found out how much those helicoptors were raping
> the police budget so they didn't have money left for
> anything else, and were COMPLETELY ineffective in
> finding real criminals, they were forced to get rid of
> them.
>
> That's your angle -- start talking to people about how
> crime goes UP because the helicoptors take the budget
> away from REAL police work just so some immature yahoos
> can go for 'copter joy rides.
>
> Look into the $$. You'll be surprised.

Actually, Jeff, no, I wouldn't be surprised at all.

Besides the offensive noise, the main other thing that
bothers me about the helicopters is that -- even *without*
looking into it at all -- I *know* that they're wasting
an *incredible* amount of fuel cruising around over my
block a couple of times a day.

I mean, come on -- my neighborhood here is *way* safer
than the one I lived in in Philly, so what in the world
are they looking for *every day*?!!

So I'm totally in agreement with you: I too think it's just
a chance for "immature yahoos [to] go for 'copter joy rides".
So it was really good of you to bring up the financial
aspect, because it's a tremendous waste of taxpayer money.

And for the record, I also agree with your other statement
that it's *never* OK to do a warantless search under the
US Constitution .. or at the very least, the cops should
have to show some pretty *strong* evidence of probable cause
first before they're allowed to do a warantless search.

-monz

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @... address at http://mail.yahoo.com

🔗X. J. Scott <xjscott@...>

Hey Monz,

> And for the record, I also agree with your other statement
> that it's *never* OK to do a warantless search under the
> US Constitution .. or at the very least, the cops should
> have to show some pretty *strong* evidence of probable cause
> first before they're allowed to do a warantless search.
-----------------------------------------------

Article Five

The sight of the people to be secure in their persons,
houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable
searches and seizures, shall NOT be violateh, and NO
warrants shall issue, but upon PROBABLE CAUSE,
SUPPORTED BY OATH or affirmation, and PARTICULARLY
DESCRIBING THE PLACE TO BE SEARCHED, AND the person OR
THINGS TO BE SEIZED.

In other words warrantless searches are ALWAYS ILLEGAL
in the US and if a cop wants to try and do one then in
my legal opinion he is acting outside of his powers as
a legitimate officer of the peace, and is acting
illegally and is therefore a criminal and YOU HAVE THE
RIGHT TO DEFEND YOUR PROPERTY AND LIFE AGAINST ATTACKS
BY CRIMINALS.

- Jeff

🔗monz <joemonz@...>

> From: X. J. Scott <xjscott@...>
> To: <metatuning@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2002 12:28 PM
> Subject: Re: [metatuning] FW: Cal. Police Can Search Car for ID's
>
>
> > [me, monz]
> > And for the record, I also agree with your other statement
> > that it's *never* OK to do a warantless search under the
> > US Constitution .. or at the very least, the cops should
> > have to show some pretty *strong* evidence of probable cause
> > first before they're allowed to do a warantless search.
> -----------------------------------------------
>
> [Jeff]
> Article Five
>
> The sight of the people to be secure in their persons,
> houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable
> searches and seizures, shall NOT be violateh, and NO
> warrants shall issue, but upon PROBABLE CAUSE,
> SUPPORTED BY OATH or affirmation, and PARTICULARLY
> DESCRIBING THE PLACE TO BE SEARCHED, AND the person OR
> THINGS TO BE SEIZED.
>
>
> In other words warrantless searches are ALWAYS ILLEGAL
> in the US and if a cop wants to try and do one then in
> my legal opinion he is acting outside of his powers as
> a legitimate officer of the peace, and is acting
> illegally and is therefore a criminal and YOU HAVE THE
> RIGHT TO DEFEND YOUR PROPERTY AND LIFE AGAINST ATTACKS
> BY CRIMINALS.

I like the way you put this, Jeff. As I said, I agree.
My exception would be a really extreme case ... I was going
to make up an example, but even then I couldn't think of one
that I'd be willing to justify. So basically, yes, this
new California court decision is unconstitutional. I'm
sure that it will go the the Supreme Court, and if it's
upheld there, then we've got some real problems brewing
in the USA.

-monz

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @... address at http://mail.yahoo.com

🔗genewardsmith <genewardsmith@...>

🔗David Beardsley <db@...>

----- Original Message -----
From: "monz" <joemonz@...>

> I mean, come on -- my neighborhood here is *way* safer
> than the one I lived in in Philly, so what in the world
> are they looking for *every day*?!!

Ther're looking for for the like of you Joe, coming to get you dude.

Seriously Joe, your neighborhood in Philly seemed really
bad - that's why I never came down to visit. It was
really a bad idea to tell me about gun shots in the night.
I don't need to be a statistic.

As for Southern Ca., I was in Aneheim last week.
I walking to the convention center and the police officer
shouts for me: "the crosswalk is over there!".

She's got a problem with me jaywalking in the middle of nowhere?
Her center of the universe is a crosswalk?

Other observations of LA:

After two days I'm coughing up this lung congestion from
the smog. Does San Diego has this charming air quality?

I had a Daewoo rent-a-car. Any bump in the road and
the car would bounce around so I couldn't drive more than 50-60mph.
At night other cars would fly up behind me and pass me at the last
moment, scaring the fork out of me. Interestingly enough, I
got a parking ticket in a suburb of LA. (Mellrose St.?) around
8-9pm.- surely it's safer to ticket a parked car in a suburb
then pull over some speeding loony.

🔗peteysan@...

In a message dated 1/26/02 2:49:43 PM Pacific Standard Time,
genewardsmith@... writes:

> Go rent Blue Thunder and you may get some ideas. Maybe someone gets
> undressed at the same time every day. :)
>

When I was living in Burbank I heard they had one of those choppers, and I'm
pretty sure I got picked up by it one night while I sat in my car a couple of
blocks from my house. The neighbors were all asleep, and no other cars went
by. Moments after the copter passed over four squad cars tore around the
corners--rather stealthily too I might add, two ahead and two from the rear,
and pinned me, so to speak. They had to let me go, though, I'm almost
completely harmless in person...mostly...sort of...ulp! But I _was_ just
sitting there quietly dreading going home to a cavilling wife.
Not to mention being obviously white, polite, a resident, and a lucky
sombitch, sorry...I have not heard nice stories about BPD from non-residents
or people of color.
(My experiences with LAPD gave me the impression that they're nasty to
everybody, but nastier to non-whites, fa sho'!)

The Blue Thunder thingie flew high and slow and sounded more like a plane,
maybe louder, but not as rude-sounding as a regular helicopter, kind of
'slick', and ominous. Pretty sneaky way up there like that, though, and
seemed to work just fine.

Yeah, and I just realized that this had to be about ten years ago! They've
no doubt been emboldened to fly lower and have no qualms about harrassing the
likes of Joe Monzo. Hee!

BTW, monz, I thought your translation work I've seen is extraordinary! I had
but a little Latin, more of French in intensity. If I could have done it, I
would have done it like that! Merci.

pete

Pete

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

🔗monz <joemonz@...>

> From: <peteysan@...>
> To: <metatuning@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2002 1:31 AM
> Subject: Re: [metatuning] Re: FW: Cal. Police Can Search Car for ID's
>
>
> Yeah, and I just realized that this had to be about ten years ago!
They've
> no doubt been emboldened to fly lower and have no qualms about harrassing
the
> likes of Joe Monzo. Hee!

Well, if they're smart they're monitoring this email exchange
too, so they can nail me for treason or some such! ;-)

I liked the story about the Oceanside fellow who shined the
flashlight at the 'copter, because on the occasional times
when it's not a quick fly-by, but rather a prolonged circling
(for up to a half-hour), I'll go out on the balcony and sneer
at them for a while, in hopes that their sophisticated optical
detection systems can see it. ;-)

> BTW, monz, I thought your translation work I've seen is extraordinary! I
had
> but a little Latin, more of French in intensity. If I could have done it,
I
> would have done it like that! Merci.

Thanks, Pete, I really appreciate that! I surprise myself with
what I accomplish in these translations sometimes. The only
language I ever studied in school was French, and since I hardly
ever get to use that it gets very rusty very fast. I somehow
taught myself to understand the Latin and Greek treatise I've
translated. And I continue to struggle with the German stuff,
but luckily other list subscribers (chiefly Klaus Schmirler)
have been willing pretty up my work there.

-monz

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @... address at http://mail.yahoo.com

🔗peteysan@...

In a message dated 1/26/02 12:25:10 PM Pacific Standard Time,
xjscott@... writes:

> In other words warrantless searches are ALWAYS ILLEGAL
> in the US and if a cop wants to try and do one then in
> my legal opinion he is acting outside of his powers as
> a legitimate officer of the peace, and is acting
> illegally and is therefore a criminal and YOU HAVE THE
> RIGHT TO DEFEND YOUR PROPERTY AND LIFE AGAINST ATTACKS
> BY CRIMINALS.
>

Howdy, Jeff!

I'd say that's putting it succintly, provocatively, and not at all
reductively. Kind of a chuckle, too!
It also strikes me as a complete thought, which feels strangely like a
refreshing blast of truth, which I haven't heard much of from the Bench in a
long time. Can't say why it seems all the sensible opinions are dissenting,
anymore.

All these jokers seem to have a mighty good head of steam up to completely
dismantle the laws of the land. The Supreme Court could be a hope, but they
haven't been too sharp for a while, either, dang it! as you indicated. But
at least they're expected to read the danged Constitution, unlike these Cali
clowns, apparently.

Hstick's point is well taken, also. I've read repeated predictions that
until white folks start feeling the pinch, too, etc. But both of my
children's grandfathers were such lawnorder white guys, they had no doubts
that the Police State were their friends, as they surely were, as long they
were good corporate wall street fellows who enjoyed the good life of
cocktails and golf and deferrent women and foreigners.

One kind of near-rebirth of my father happened when he got a fat gig in
Mexico and his VP's wife was native-indigenous. When she told him what the
real deal was, he listened for the first time in his life, got stricken with
conscience and quit. Amazing.

But what really worries me is materialist-opportunist mentality of so many
younger people in this country, and probably world over like the Salvadoran
kid who was bucking for a union gig at the supermarket now can't imagine life
without a TV! Sweet kid, moral guy, but...gotta have a happenin TV and a
nice car, dvd and a microwave or it ain't livin'. So many young ones whose
values are like my father's minus certain hypocrisies like (false)
christianity, and liberty and justice for all-who-can-pick-up-the-check. I
can't help wondering if not even paying lip service anymore isn't a loss of
sorts, too.

Atrophied minds and imaginations for whom the Constitution is too complex?

The last issue of the campus newsletter where I'm a recently enrolled old
codger was appallingly lacking in writing and analytical skill. And this is
CSU, not Community College!

To be fair, the smart kids I've met are much better prepared than I ever was
for this world, and their moral imaginations plenty advanced, in surprising
ways.

But many of my old friends eventually turned a blind or jaundiced eye on
social questions for the relatively comfortable struggles of mortgage
payments, gadgets and "high-achieving" private schools for the kids, or just
making the nut and doing cutesy little "activist" things for the public
school their kid's at. Or consumed by divorce, dismay, drugs. I succumb,
too, but somehow I always end up hating it and coming down with 'fanatic's
backlash' and 'luddite's anxiety'. The shrill, ineffectual sour grapes of
progressive politics, as the right-wingers love to portray it. Sorry. But
you know, when I feel myself being or becoming the thing I hate, and it
chafes rather than humbles?

Yes, I think we are in for some VERY interesting times.

Love,

Pete

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]