D.Kan.: Consent to search a car includes removing parts removable without tools

Consent to search includes removing easily removable parts to a car that can be reattached without tools. Officers here also had probable cause to believe the vehicle had a hidden compartment. United States v. Gutierrez, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30835 (D. Kan. March 30, 2010).*

Defendant was parked, and an unmarked car pulled up along side and then parked and the officers got out to talk to him. The officers asked for his DL. He was not stopped at this point. (“They did not order the occupants of the vehicle to do anything except produce a driver’s license, registration, and proof of insurance, which they were entitled to do under Drayton. See id. Because there was no seizure, the officers did not violate the Fourth Amendment.” [Oh, come on. They can refuse?]) When defendant could not produce a license, the encounter became a stop. The stop escalated into a valid patdown. United States v. Wade, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30775 (E.D. Pa. March 29, 2010).*

Claim that a privileged document was seized from defendant’s property was not supported by the record, so the claim is denied. United States v. Capshaw, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31356 (M.D. Ala. March 15, 2010).*

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.