CA9: Officers must have PC defendant had a parole search condition before the search

Officers must have probable cause to know defendant had a parole search condition before searching, and here they had that. United States v. Estrella, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 13994 (9th Cir. June 6, 2023). (In my state, it comes up on a DL search.)

“[R]equiring a passenger lawfully ordered to exit a vehicle during a lawful traffic stop to set aside a purse, absent consent to search it, is a mere inconvenience eclipsed by legitimate officer safety concerns. See Mimms, 434 U.S. at 111. Thus, engaging in such a procedure, as a matter of course, is a negligibly burdensome precaution for officer safety permissible under the Fourth Amendment. Accordingly, Meyer has failed to show that the district court erred by concluding that separating her from her purse did not result in an unlawful seizure.” Meyer v. State, 2023 Ida. App. LEXIS 13 (June 6, 2023).*

New Jersey’s registration search exception isn’t unlimited. Officers can order people out of a car, and they can deny them access after that for safety reasons. “The revocation of the authority to conduct a search for the registration certificate when officers prevent a motorist from reentering the detained vehicle for reasons of officer safety corresponds to the revocation of the authority to conduct an automobile exception search when officers tow and impound the subject vehicle for reasons of public and officer safety.” In a registration search, that’s the limit of the officer’s authority. State v. Johnson, 2023 N.J. Super. LEXIS 60 (June 6, 2023).*

This entry was posted in Emergency / exigency, Probation / Parole search, Reasonable suspicion. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.