Court upholds warrants for F&W officers

[IDVortex]

I've hand a good amount of interaction with cops, 1 with my wife and she was pissed with me after the fact. I'll never allow a cop to search without a warrant, and I won't answer more then I need to, or ask why. If I haven't done a crime, I'm still not going to bend over and take it.

Oh, and I am actively trying to become a cop, and I still don't think someone should ever volunteer info, cops are humans, with emotions, bad days, etc. Trust no one.

 

[IDVortex]

That’s the thing, if you’ve nothing to hide you can have a perfectly pleasant interaction with a warden and go on about your day, if you get defensive and start trying to hide things, your day is probably going to be ruined.

In your examples:
1) you offered to let him look in the cooler and at that point he declined
2) his simple questions and your responses gave him no reason to be suspicious so he moved on about his day

I guess the real question, as to the original question about sitting on the side of the road glassing, doing nothing illegal and the warden asks to look in your cooler there are 2 options

1)you say yes, maybe he takes a quick peek and you both go on about your day
2)you say no, now he has reason to be suspicious that you may be hiding something, so he starts making calls to try and get a warrant, in the meantime he likely isn’t going to leave your side so your day is pretty well ruined until he does get that warrant

I would pick option 1 every time


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Would you allow yourself to be detained even if you haven't done anything wrong?

 

[Customweld]

It's easy to think that if you're not doing anything wrong that you don't have anything to hide. Except for the fact that there are so many laws on the books, that the average American commits at least 3 felonies a day.
If you look at Idaho's definition of hunting, everyone of us are hunting, whether we think we are or not.
Idaho Definition:
Definition of Hunting Hunting means chasing, driving, flushing, attracting, pursuing, worrying, following or on the trail of, shooting at, stalking, or lying in wait for any wildlife whether or not such wildlife is then/ or subsequently captured, killed, taken or wounded.

 

[rtkbowhunter]

"if you've got nothing to hide..."


JHC... Pretty sure I don't need to prove my innocence. That comment makes me gag... the number of folks that roll over like frightened puppies. pi$$ing themselves in compliance to an over reaching government agency. For the love of God people, act like you have inherent rights.

 

[JohnJohnson]

Oh, and I am actively trying to become a cop, and I still don't think someone should ever volunteer info, cops are humans, with emotions, bad days, etc. Trust no one.

The general sentiment cops/lawyers tell their loved ones is never speak to the police unless you're required to, and in that situation with a lawyer. I always encourage everyone to watch this video. Police are not your friend and speaking with them only has the possibility to be neutral or bad. It can't really help you.

 

[IDVortex]

that the average American commits at least 3 felonies a day.

You're one of the few people I have ever seen or heard say this. So many people are not aware of this.

 

[mtwarden]

As far as the case; it's a TN case so it applies to TN—I wouldn't make an assumption that it applies to your state.

I can comment on Montana; if we were to put cameras on private property we'd need a warrant (if you wanted the case to hold up). If you have sufficient probable cause, a warrant isn't a huge deal. In Montana (probably other states too) we can even do it telephonically—bit of a pain, but doable and very handy at 2:00 AM and you're 60 miles from town

 

[jjohnsonElknewbie]

When I was a young and dumb college student, I got pulled over and submitted to a field sobriety test. I passed the light in the eyes, alphabet, and walking tests, but the deputy wasn't satisfied. He pulled out his field breathalyzer and I blew .11 (this was 1996 and IA limit was .10). Now, the field breathalyzers weren't admissible in court due to margin of error, but the results provided enough cause for an arrest.

When I got to the station the first thing they asked was when I'd had my last drink. Again, being dumb I told them the truth which was "within the last hour". So, what happened next? They put me on ice for 90 minutes to ensure that my blood alcohol concentration was maximized when they administered the Intoxylyzer test at the station. This is the only result that is admissible in court. Well what do you know? After waiting for 90 minutes, I blew .109 on the official machine. Open and shut right? You would think so, but those machines have a margin of error of +/- 10% per the manufacturer. Subtract 10% and I was under the legal limit of .1.

My parents and I decided to fight this case. The first step was a DOT review which predictably found me guilty. We appealed the ruling, and with an expert witness prevailed in the first actual court case. The DOT appealed to a higher court and won via technicality. The next step would've been to present the case to the supreme court, and at that point we'd already spent $10k. Unfotunately, we couldn't afford to take the case any further and ended up taking a "plea" of "failed test result". This was supposedly better than an OWI legally, but I still lost my license for 6 months, had to pay for a work permit and mobile breathylyzer for my car, and 7 years of SR22 insurance.

We tried to fight the law and the law won. It was then that I learned you definitely "can't fight city hall" as the deck is already stacked against you.

LEOs have my absolute respect and admiration for the job they do. However, just like every other job, there are some bad apples. In some cases the " to protect and serve" is more like "we're out to get you".

 

[Dos Perros]

That’s the thing, if you’ve nothing to hide you can have a perfectly pleasant interaction with a warden and go on about your day, if you get defensive and start trying to hide things, your day is probably going to be ruined.

In your examples:
1) you offered to let him look in the cooler and at that point he declined
2) his simple questions and your responses gave him no reason to be suspicious so he moved on about his day

I guess the real question, as to the original question about sitting on the side of the road glassing, doing nothing illegal and the warden asks to look in your cooler there are 2 options

1)you say yes, maybe he takes a quick peek and you both go on about your day
2)you say no, now he has reason to be suspicious that you may be hiding something, so he starts making calls to try and get a warrant, in the meantime he likely isn’t going to leave your side so your day is pretty well ruined until he does get that warrant

I would pick option 1 every time


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What year did your ancestors emigrate to this great continent? 1840's? Irish?

 

[Bubblehide]

...

"If you're not breaking the law, you got nothing to worry about." Until you do...

... While I'm in CO, I'm 100% legal to possess the cannabis while I'm in the state. ...

Using loophole Seward County Nebraska seizes millions from motorists without convicting them of crimes

Unless you are on Federal Land, or are interacting with a Federal Officer; which is pretty much every law enforcement agency since 9-11. Remember the State made it legal, not the Feds.

 

[Dos Perros]

I think this is a horrible mindset to have. We should all care about our rights. Would you be cool with a cop grabbing your phone and going through your private text messages because you have nothing to hide?

This x10.

 

[Marble]

Roger that, but I've also seen where the false positive rate of dogs is surprisingly high, and sometimes they "alert" when simply guided/directed by their handler. Dogs want to please their owner, so if they are given direction, they often "alert" for approval/reward vs. actually finding something.

That is reported to happen and talked of more than it does. Defense attorneys use this rational as a defense. I've never seen it happen, nor did we ever have a dog that did that.

I think the problem is with agencies with a combination of bad handlers, policies and training. What the rate of that is, I can't say, and don't think anyone could quantify it.

If a dog alerts, the officer then searches and finds contraband etc, using the argument the dog alerted on command or only to please the owner is an argument that I have never seen work. That's considering hundreds of cases of very large seizures, including money and drugs.

I have no doubt there are corrupt or unethical officers that have done things with their dogs they should not have. I just never saw that.

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

 

[Marble]

Roger that, but I've also seen where the false positive rate of dogs is surprisingly high, and sometimes they "alert" when simply guided/directed by their handler. Dogs want to please their owner, so if they are given direction, they often "alert" for approval/reward vs. actually finding something.

That is reported to happen and talked of more than it does. Defense attorneys use this rational as a defense. I've never seen it happen, nor did we ever have a dog that did that.

I think the problem is with agencies with a combination of bad handlers, policies and training. What the rate of that is, I can't say, and don't think anyone could quantify it.

If a dog alerts, the officer then searches and finds contraband etc, using the argument the dog alerted on command or only to please the owner is an argument that I have never seen work. That's considering hundreds of cases of very large seizures, including money and drugs.

I have no doubt there are corrupt or unethical officers that have done things with their dogs they should not have. I just never saw that.

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

 

[cnelk]

This is what I know and have experienced with game wardens;

If you wave at them, that is considered initiating contact and they now have a purpose to stop and 'visit' with you.

Ive had it happen twice - there wont be a third.

 

[isItFallYet]

This is what I know and have experienced with game wardens;

If you wave at them, that is considered initiating contact and they now have a purpose to stop and 'visit' with you.

Ive had it happen twice - there wont be a third.

Interesting…

 

[180ls1]

This is what I know and have experienced with game wardens;

If you wave at them, that is considered initiating contact and they now have a purpose to stop and 'visit' with you.

Ive had it happen twice - there wont be a third.

That is still a consensual encounter regardless of who initiated contact. Your action of waiving or not does not dictate their ability to stop you. Unless there are extenuating circumstances, frantic waiving, hands covered in blood...

I am not saying you are wrong for not wanting to waive but unless you are detained you are free to go.

 

[cnelk]

That is still a consensual encounter regardless of who initiated contact. Your action of waiving or not does not dictate their ability to stop you. Unless there are extenuating circumstances, frantic waiving, hands covered in blood...

I am not saying you are wrong for not wanting to waive but unless you are detained you are free to go.

Last year about this time, I was walking around on my Wyo property where my cabin is at. About midmorning the WGF truck happened to drive by on the county road - and I waved.

At the time I didnt have my driveway in, but he slowed down and then pulled into my neighbors driveway, drove thru their property to get to my cabin.

Asked me some questions and even asked for my phone number.

Now why would he do that? Just based on a wave...

 

[180ls1]

Last year about this time, I was walking around on my Wyo property where my cabin is at. About midmorning the WGF truck happened to drive by on the county road - and I waved.

At the time I didnt have my driveway in, but he slowed down and then pulled into my neighbors driveway, drove thru their property to get to my cabin.

Asked me some questions and even asked for my phone number.

Now why would he do that? Just based on a wave...

He could have done the exact same thing had you not waived.

 

[Dos Perros]

He could have done the exact same thing had you not waived.

Not necessarily. I would argue the area around one's cabin falls within the definition of curtilage.

 

[180ls1]

I would argue the area around one's cabin falls within the definition of curtilage.

Sure. What mechanism would prevent them from talking to him?