58 Fireworks Cars Seized

[Ryan Ruck]

So much for the 4th Amendment…

58 Fireworks Cars Seized

New Yorkers are learning the hard way that an initiative to keep July 4th firecrackers out of the city means just what the warning signs on the highway say: "Transport fireworks, lose your vehicle."

The NYPD has now corralled 58 vehicles under Mayor Bloomberg's fireworks crackdown, officials said yesterday.

To get the message out, the city has eight 9-by-12-foot electronic signs that are rolled around the five boroughs and placed primarily at highways, bridges and tunnels.

"We're doing this to deter people from transporting illegal fireworks," said a law-enforcement source.

Police said 161 calls had been made to 311 during the initiative, although it is not clear how many calls led directly to vehicle seizures.

The mayor's office said more than 770 cases of illegal fireworks have been confiscated by the NYPD Vice Enforcement Division in conjunction with the city's Joint Fireworks Taskforce and more than 60 people have been arrested for possessing or trafficking illegal fireworks.

[Aplomb]

Help me out, Ryan. Isn't it supposed to be that with regard to vehicles, it is unconstitutional for law enforcement to open closed containers such as bags that are in the vehicles; but it is lawful to look through the windows and if you see something in plain view, then the police have the right to seize that contraband, not the vehicles? I guess if they are also arresting people, the vehicles would consequently have to be empounded. Can't these people sue?

In Colorado it's dry right now, grass fires are easy to start, and so all fireworks are illegal to use in some places, like Denver. Or at least I thought that was the reasoning behind it. Is there something going on in America to try to ban fireworks now?

[Ryan Ruck]

Help me out, Ryan. Isn't it supposed to be that with regard to vehicles, it is unconstitutional for law enforcement to open closed containers such as bags that are in the vehicles; but it is lawful to look through the windows and if you see something in plain view, then the police have the right to seize that contraband, not the vehicles? I guess if they are also arresting people, the vehicles would consequently have to be empounded. Can't these people sue?

In Colorado it's dry right now, grass fires are easy to start, and so all fireworks are illegal to use in some places, like Denver. Or at least I thought that was the reasoning behind it. Is there something going on in America to try to ban fireworks now?

It would typically be the case that an officer cannot legally go rifling through a car or its contents without a) the driver's consent b) a legally obtained warrant or c) probable cause (i.e. a "roach" in the ashtray, an unmarked pill bottle, etc.). However, as I understand it, there are a couple other methods.

One other method is that the officer may conduct a Terry frisk to ensure officer safety. Granted, this may only be conducted if the officer has reasonable suspicion to believe that you are armed and pose a danger to him. Of course, most people don't know this and will immediately comply with an officer who "persuasively" requests or even demands a frisk. This frisk may also be extended to a vehicle's immediate area available to the driver and all passengers in the vehicle. Thus, through a Terry frisk, an officer can ostensibly search a vehicle.

A second method is that the office places the suspect driver under arrest. As such, when the driver is placed under arrest, a vehicle catalog is conducted. This is in essence a search of the vehicle. This is done under the auspices of ensuring that all of the arrestee's "valuable" possessions in the vehicle are officially logged to prevent theft. As a result, any contraband found during this cataloging can be used to bring additional charges against the arrestee in addition to the one(s) for the initial arrest.

Lovely how all these miraculous "backdoors" exist to trampling our rights isn't it? I'm sure it is completely within the spirit of what the Founders intended…

There are a number of steps that a driver can take to ensure that their 4th Amendment rights are upheld during a traffic stop. First and foremost is to politely decline any request by the law enforcement officer to conduct a search. If you consent to a search and any contraband turns up, you will have forfeited certain protective rights otherwise afforded to you.

In the event that an officer is absolutely determined to search the vehicle either unconstitutionally or via a Terry frisk, the best course of action when stepping out of the vehicle is to ensure that all your keys are in the ignition, all windows are rolled up and, you use your power locks (assuming you have them) to lock and shut all the doors after exiting the vehicle. This way, your vehicle is secured and cannot be searched without forcible entry. Entry which the law enforcement officer is denied unless he produces a valid warrant or obtains probable cause (i.e. alerting by a drug dog). This will likely be a hassle to you but, could save many legal troubles.

Your best way around being locked out is to have a AAA membership or keep a key hidden somewhere on the undercarriage of the vehicle (i.e. in a magnetic key holder). Obviously, it is best to wait until the officer is no longer present before reopening the vehicle.

There is a lot of information out there that can be of assistance in understanding your rights and how to best go about protecting them. Most people do not take the time to understand and as such, are easily railroaded into criminalizing themselves (no matter how small the crime may seem). Here are two links that can give you a primer on such information about vehicle searches outside of the common methods:

- The Salt Lake County District Attorney’s Office - Conducting a Terry Frisk During a Traffic Stop

- Searching Vehicles Without Warrants - The Federal Law Enforcement Training Center

That second link has the various types of searches an officer may conduct and a bit of general information about each one. If you want to learn more about each type, just use that as a reference for each and do a little digging for more information.

Remember… Always stick up for your rights or else you will lose them!!!

As for the impounding of the vehicles as described in the above article, who knows. The legality of it would likely have to be taken up in the courts. Law enforcement may already seize vehicles for drunken driving, lack of insurance, possession of narcotics, prostitution, general arrest and, likely a couple other reasons. The legality of seizures under some of the previously mentioned conditions is in fact still in dispute in some locations. So, who knows…

(Keep in mind that I am not an attorney and what I have told you above shouldn't be considered authoritative legal advice!)

[Aplomb]

Thanks a lot, Ryan.

One other method is that the officer may conduct a Terry frisk to ensure officer safety. Granted, this may only be conducted if the officer has reasonable suspicion to believe that you are armed and pose a danger to him.

How funny, since my family calls me Terri.

[Joey Bagadonuts]

Excellent thread! Regarding search and seizure...I think you guys would be interested in a little case called "Mapp vs. Ohio".

This decision amplified the "exclusionary rule" regarding admissability of illegally obtained evidence.

http://vava.essortment.com/mappohiosuprem_rouv.htm