{"id":6483,"date":"2012-10-04T10:10:00","date_gmt":"2012-01-02T00:01:04","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2011-12-30T17:22:36","slug":"en-US","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=6483","title":{"rendered":"LA5: Pretextual stop had factual basis so it was lawful"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Admitted pretextual stop had a factual basis, so it was legal. <a href=\"http:\/\/www.fifthcircuit.org\/PDF\/OPINIONS\/PO\/2011\/343B00E4-2D2F-4392-8807-641A015E2A75.pdf\">State v. Martin<\/a>, 83 So. 3d 230 (La. App. 5 Cir. 2011):<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>In the instant case, the officer was justified in stopping defendant&#8217;s vehicle. Officer Mekdessie observed that defendant violated a traffic law in that he had a broken taillight on his vehicle. The Jefferson Parish Sheriff&#8217;s Office Arrest Report and Probable Cause Affidavit contained in the record show that defendant was charged with having improper equipment in violation of LSA-R.S. 32:53, which requires that a vehicle contain parts in proper condition.<\/p>\n<p>Moreover, there was no evidence that this stop was a pretext to investigate the commission of other crimes. However, even if it was, this Court indicated in <a href=\"http:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=17428821488077148074&amp;q=31+So.3d+513&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2,10\">Davis<\/a> [31 So.3d 513], that police officers may make an initial traffic stop after observing a traffic infraction, even if the stop is a pretext to investigate for other crimes. Also, the fact that the officer did not issue a citation for the traffic offense is not relevant to the constitutionality of the stop.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>A motion to suppress is to raise Fourth Amendment violations before trial. It is not to be used in place of a motion in limine of evidence to be excluded. <a href=\"http:\/\/www.state.il.us\/court\/Opinions\/AppellateCourt\/2011\/4thDistrict\/December\/4100343.pdf\">People v. Burney<\/a>, 2011 Ill. App. LEXIS 1295, 2011 IL App (4th) 100343 (December 27, 2011),* modified on denial of rehearing January 26, 2012.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>b2evALnk.b2WPAutP <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=6483\">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-6483","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6483","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=6483"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6483\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=6483"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=6483"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=6483"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}