You rights in regard to being searched

[ops_south]

If he's searching you for his own saftey, then he has probable cause to believe that you might be a danger to him.  Refusal of search does not constitute reasonable cause. 

Not entirely true.  An officer needs reasonable suspicion, not probable cause to search if he/she believes that a subject may be presently armed or dangerous.  Probable cause is required for arrest without a warrant.

[Susuki_Jah]

If he's searching you for his own saftey, then he has probable cause to believe that you might be a danger to him.  Refusal of search does not constitute reasonable cause. 

Not entirely true.  An officer needs reasonable suspicion, not probable cause to search if he/she believes that a subject may be presently armed or dangerous.  Probable cause is required for arrest without a warrant.

true true.   I would think most are honest though. and I beleive this to be true.   But it is good to allow them this right as well. as there are a lot of screw ups in the world that need to get thier door knocked down .

I have a lot of cop friends so I can see both sides of the stories.  heck even thought about becoming a cop

[aaronstj]

more importantly... was this part.

Many people believe that an officer must automatically read a person his or her Miranda rights as part of performing an arrest,

yes, part of the arrest is being mirandized.

Due to the prevalence of American television programs and motion pictures in which the police characters frequently read suspects their rights, it has become an expected element of arrest procedure. In 2000, Chief Justice William Rehnquist wrote that Miranda warnings had "become embedded in routine police practice to the point where the warnings have become part of our national culture" (Dickerson v. United States, 530 U.S. 428). However, police are only required to warn an individual whom they intend to subject to custodial interrogation at the police station or when detained. Arrests can occur without questioning and without the Miranda warning — although if the police do change their mind and decide to interrogate the suspect, the warning must be given then. Furthermore, if public safety warrants such action, the police may ask questions prior to a reading of the Miranda warning, and the evidence thus obtained can sometimes still be used against the defendant.

[makenzie71]

This is from an actual LEO...probably someone who knows a thing or two about how the cop stuff really works.

Hey makenzie71
I looked over that link. I don't feel like signing up just to debate legal issues that I have to deal with at work all the time  Search and a pat down are two different things.. I can pat anyone down even on a gut hunch but a pat down is an EXTERIOR pat of clothing WITHOUT going into pockets to FEEL for guns, knives, or any other weapon. IF I locate a weapon based on Feel and I can identify it based on feel than I can go into that pocket to get it and secure it for my safety.
I cannot Search without PC, consent, or incident to arrest. If im going to search a vehicle I have either made an arrest, located contraband in plain view, or detected the odor of marijuana.. Then I can search a Vehicle based on the carol doctrine
Because a car is mobile, the standard to search is lower, this is reffered to as the carol doctrine. An officer still needs to have a reason to search but instead of probable cause, they only need reasonable suspicion.
NO I DO not need to read Miranda warning if im arresting someone. I do not need to read the miranda warning if Im asking someone who is under arrest basic pedagree information such as name, DOB, SSN, place of birth, where they live.
I DO need to read Miranda warning if I have made an arrest and I start asking them questions about the crime they committed. ... Custody + Interrogation = Miranda otherwise whatever info I get from them will be thrown out in court.
If I make an arrest and I don't ask any questions but the guy runs his mouth or start talking and he incriminates himself further that is called a spontanious utterance.. That Utterance is admissible in court.. As long as I don't ask him questions I don't need to do anything And I dont need to stop him and read him Miranda because IM NOT ASKING QUESTIONS.
My job performance is not evaluated on how many people I arrest. My job performance is based on convictions and without following case law my evidence would be thrown out..
Yes you can tell an officer No if he asks to search, Its your right, its a Constitutional right..... If an officer does his job wrong and violates your constitutional rights he is liable in a CIVIL law suit. I dont know any officer who wants to be sewed for violating civil rights.
As far as the underage drinking stuff at the end / Searching / entering a house theres alot more to go into.. All I can say is some of those guys need to put their law degree back in the crackerjack box where they got it. If an officer tells you to step outside to talk and you don't and he is in the process of investigating a crime its called Obstruction of Justice and then you will be arrested. If an officer directs you to step outside and your drunk.. IF... IF you are arrested for drunk in public you would be found NOT GUILTY because you were INSTRUCTED to step outside by a LEO and you were following HIS directions. Like i said put it back into the crackerjack box..........

Further, a search incident to arrest is going to be a search of the "lunge" area or passenger compartment that is accessible to the occupants. AFter an arrest is made.
If the department allows, After an arrest and Prior to the vehicle being towed (If it needs to be towed) the contents of the vehicle will be inventoried by the officer, This is also for liability reasons. Contraband can be found during an inventory and it is admissible.

Fell free to past this on the other board since i ended up writing a freeking book .. LOL

[ixolas]

Hey makenzie71
As far as the underage drinking stuff at the end / Searching / entering a house theres alot more to go into.. All I can say is some of those guys need to put their law degree back in the crackerjack box where they got it.

I wasn't claiming any type of law knowledge I just was trying to give some tips on not getting your friends arrested at your party.