{"id":4030,"date":"2010-05-24T12:23:44","date_gmt":"2010-04-05T06:21:23","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2010-04-05T06:21:23","slug":"en-US","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=4030","title":{"rendered":"CA1: Passenger without seatbelt could be asked for DL, and then arrested on warrant found for him"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Officer was able to ask passenger for his name and DOB for a passenger seat belt violation. The passenger came back having a warrant out for him. The questioning was valid because the officer could ask. <a href=\"http:\/\/www.ca1.uscourts.gov\/pdf.opinions\/09-1058P-01A.pdf\">United States v. Fernandez<\/a>, 600 F.3d 56 (1st Cir. 2010):<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Other circuits had concluded before <a href=\"http:\/\/www.supremecourtus.gov\/opinions\/08pdf\/07-1122.pdf\">[Arizona v.] Johnson<\/a> that officers could properly ask a passenger for identification in circumstances similar to those before us, and Johnson&#8217;s discussion of the permissible scope of a traffic stop has only strengthened such precedent. See, e.g., United States v. Diaz-Castaneda, 494 F.3d 1146, 1152 (9th Cir. 2007) (stating, in the context of a passenger inquiry, that \u201c[t]he police may ask people who have legitimately been stopped for identification  without conducting a [separate] Fourth Amendment search or seizure\u201d) (citing Hiibel, 542 U.S. at 185); United States v. Soriano-Jarquin, 492 F.3d 495, 500 (4th Cir. 2007) (\u201cIf an officer may &#8216;as a matter of course&#8217; and in the interest of personal safety order a passenger physically to exit the vehicle, he may surely take the minimally intrusive step of requesting passenger identification.\u201d) (citing Wilson, 519 U.S. at 410); United States v. Rice, 483 F.3d 1079, 1084 (10th Cir. 2007) (\u201c[B]ecause passengers present a risk to officer safety equal to the risk presented by the driver, an officer may ask for identification from passengers and run background checks on them as well.\u201d) (citing Wilson, 519 U.S. at 413-414). [\u00b6] We therefore hold that, based on the record before us, no Fourth Amendment violation occurred. <\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>b2evALnk.b2WPAutP <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=4030\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"pingsdone","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-4030","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4030","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=4030"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4030\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=4030"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=4030"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=4030"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}