Traffic stop, officer confiscated my firearms.

[rhart]

I admit I haven't read all 11 pages of posts but I will throw in my 2 cents.
Obviously you were very close to the BAC limit. But so what? Legal is legal right? Even if you "had an infraction for a headlight out" that gives the officer no right to confiscate your firearms. I would be super upset to say the least.
As far as not having money to pay a lawyer. I thought if you had a strong case you could find a lawyer that would do it for a percentage of the cival suit payout. But I'm not sure.
I would at the very least file a complaint. Unless there is more to the story or I'm just not understanding properly. Either way, good luck to you and keep us posted.

 

[lrahm]

I admit I haven't read all 11 pages of posts but I will throw in my 2 cents.
Obviously you were very close to the BAC limit. But so what? Legal is legal right? Even if you "had an infraction for a headlight out" that gives the officer no right to confiscate your firearms. I would be super upset to say the least.
As far as not having money to pay a lawyer. I thought if you had a strong case you could find a lawyer that would do it for a percentage of the cival suit payout. But I'm not sure.
I would at the very least file a complaint. Unless there is more to the story or I'm just not understanding properly. Either way, good luck to you and keep us posted.

He tested .07%. I don't think that we will ever get the whole and real story. It has bounced around several different times. If he tested .08 % BAC he is considered too drunk to drive. He is arrested. At .07% he could and should have been tested to see if he was going up at the time of the stop, if he was driving. .

As far as the weapon confiscation, would you give a drunk person a gun if you were a police officer at a car stop? The officer did the right thing. He got off easy, did I say easy. But it is up to him to talk to a lawyer don't take my word for it.

 

[gunowner930]

Maybe I've heard wrong, but a LEO buddy of mine told me that you can arrested for a DUI at above .04 if you're obviously drunk. Is this true?

 

[TTravis]

He tested .07%. I don't think that we will ever get the whole and real story. It has bounced around several different times. If he tested .08 % BAC he is considered too drunk to drive. He is arrested. At .07% he could and should have been tested to see if he was going up at the time of the stop, if he was driving. .

I've told the story and laid everything out there as completely and honestly I possibly can. The only thing I left out is I did request to be tested again after standing around in front of that cop car for nearly an hour. He declined to test me saying something about not having another mouthpiece.

 

[lrahm]

I've told the story and laid everything out there as completely and honestly I possibly can. The only thing I left out is I did request to be tested again after standing around in front of that cop car for nearly an hour. He declined to test me saying something about not having another mouthpiece.

If you were driving, you probably would/should have gone for a test on the datamaster. You could have still been going up. That would have been a whole lot more expensive.

 

[j706]

It probably does not pertain to your case, since you have such a strong defense. (In your opinion)

But, I have witnessed a Judge ORDERING the Prosecutor to come back with a more appropriate charge for a defendant who tried to game the system after being given breaks by the arresting Officer and the Prosecutor's Office. And then continued the game in his courtroom.

In other words, a pissed off Judge is someone to be feared.

Two crimes were committed that evening. One by you, one by your son. Not just a traffic infraction. You really need to realize that. They chose to not charge you with those crimes.

You really need an attorney at your side if you choose to fight it.

Very sound advice!! Judges have been known to get testy over things like this. Something to think long and hard about IMO. Oh and by the way, the judge can fine you up to 500.00 on a C infraction....just because he/she wants to.

 

[j706]

Maybe I've heard wrong, but a LEO buddy of mine told me that you can arrested for a DUI at above .04 if you're obviously drunk. Is this true?

You can be arrested for OWI at .000 bac

 

[sloughfoot]

Maybe I've heard wrong, but a LEO buddy of mine told me that you can arrested for a DUI at above .04 if you're obviously drunk. Is this true?

No, the charge is driving while "Impaired". DWI. Driving while impaired.

Although the standard for DWI for a CDL driver is indeed .04, unlike everybody else.

Impairmant can be caused by prescription drugs or physical impairments.

Although it would take a real hard ass to charge you with DWI and a co-opperative PA to charge a diabetic or other physical impaired person. FWIW, I have never seen it happen. But if a diabetic lkilled everyone on a school bus and the Mayor's nephew was on that bus.....?

 

[revolvers&w]

That brings back memories and makes me feel old. What year was that? 70s ???

I think Allied Forces came out in 1981.

 

[Typhon1390]

Just read through this whole thread.. I fall on the side that says take your lumps and move along, it could have been a lot worse. While he may or may not have had PC to stop you, you were (optimistically) breaking at least one law, the officer acted in accordance with the law in not returning your weapons, and there's little if anything to be gained from trying to game the system in court especially considering the potential consequences.

I also have to say it's really cool seeing all the LE on here providing helpful input and giving us perspective on where you're coming from. One thing I found particularly interesting was how letting people off results in IA complaints, but sadly that actually makes a lot of sense.

 

[slackerisme]

I have a situation where I was stopped for a traffic infraction. (class C infraction). When asked if I had any weapons, I told the officer that I had a permit and there were a couple firearms in the car which I was carrying legally. I remained calm and cooperative. My military experience kicked and I just took what the officer had to say as if I were being chewed out by a superior officer. I did not offer any argument or resistance.

I believe the officer was quite upset with me because of my handguns. I had a few beers earlier, and blew .07 which is under the legal limit. I don't think I said or did anything that would make the officer consider me to be impaired, or dangerous. I was not ticked at the time but later received a citation in the mail (30 days after the event).

At the scene, the officer went ahead and searched my vehicle, without my connect. I did not resist. I was put in cuffs. No Miranda reading. He wanted to tow my vehicle, but ultimately, I talked him into letting other members of my nearby household come and drive me home.

My guns were confiscated. I was told that I would have to go to the local town chief of police to see if I could get them back. I think that was supposed to intimidate me. This was a Saturday night. The chief was on vacation the next week. On Wednesday, the following week, I finally got my guns back after it was verified that I was not cited and there were no pending charges (at that time). I did not get my ammo back. I went to the police station and picked up my guns at the front window in a shoe box, all zip tied, and no ammo. I was glad to get my guns back and did not make a fuss about the ammo.

There are a lot of details I am leaving out here because the traffic offence is an active case and I do not want to incriminate myself. I will eventually share the complete story. The infraction has nothing to do with alcohol.

I believe I may have grounds for a civil case, or at least a complaint against the officer and the PD. I don't think there was a just reason to take my firearms.

I would appreciate if anyone would have comments, good or bad that may help me to understand how my rights may be violated.

I just read a story about Bill H, and would like to know of any stories like mine where LE actually confiscated firearms in a traffic stop or in public.

I did talk to Guy. He understandably does not work for free. I do not have and cannot afford to hire a lawyer.

Thanks in advance.

To file you need to prove a loss or damages. What exactly are you going to sue for?

 

[Hammerhead]

I am not a lawyer and I have no dog in this fight.

But for those of you saying that him coming up with a positive defense is gaming the system, then I guess every positive defense for every suspect is "gaming the system."

I had a buddy that drove home drunk one night. The cop initially pulled him over for "not having yellow turn signals" on the front of his car. His front turn signals were white. I don't recall the outcome, but he paid a fine and whatever else. However, after he initially told me what the PC was that the officer pulled him over for, I looked up the IC. There is no law in the IC that says you have to have yellow turn signals. The law does (or did) state that they could be any other color but green, red, or blue, and could be yellow or lighter.

I told him that if he fought the ticket, the officer wouldn't have had the PC to pull him over based solely on the "no yellow turn signals." He didn't fight it, but it was a positive defense and wasn't "gaming the system."

If the original reason, and only reason, for the stop was a BS infraction that furthered the fishing trip the officer was on, then the stop or any tickets/charges aren't valid. You can't say that it was inevitable discovery either.

Cases get tossed when cops don't follow the law or procedure properly. If the officer in the OP's case pulled him over for something that wasn't valid, anything found after that isn't admissible.

He may or may not win when he gets to court. But stop telling him he shouldn't have his day there. That's the whole point of the judicial system. Traffic court sucks. He still has a right to keep from being wrongfully charged. No matter what he may or may not have done, there's no reason that LEO should have pulled him over in the first place on some bogus charge, especially if he can prove it.

 

[Udderchaos]

Whee, I read through all these posts. OP, you are lucky. Do what you feel is right. But, there may be a time when your luck runs out. I(ANAL) would go in and try to get the points off, and pay the 150.00.

 

[jsharmon7]

Do keep us updated on how this turns out.

 

[TTravis]

I am not a lawyer and I have no dog in this fight.

But for those of you saying that him coming up with a positive defense is gaming the system, then I guess every positive defense for every suspect is "gaming the system."

I had a buddy that drove home drunk one night. The cop initially pulled him over for "not having yellow turn signals" on the front of his car. His front turn signals were white. I don't recall the outcome, but he paid a fine and whatever else. However, after he initially told me what the PC was that the officer pulled him over for, I looked up the IC. There is no law in the IC that says you have to have yellow turn signals. The law does (or did) state that they could be any other color but green, red, or blue, and could be yellow or lighter.

I told him that if he fought the ticket, the officer wouldn't have had the PC to pull him over based solely on the "no yellow turn signals." He didn't fight it, but it was a positive defense and wasn't "gaming the system."

If the original reason, and only reason, for the stop was a BS infraction that furthered the fishing trip the officer was on, then the stop or any tickets/charges aren't valid. You can't say that it was inevitable discovery either.

Cases get tossed when cops don't follow the law or procedure properly. If the officer in the OP's case pulled him over for something that wasn't valid, anything found after that isn't admissible.

He may or may not win when he gets to court. But stop telling him he shouldn't have his day there. That's the whole point of the judicial system. Traffic court sucks. He still has a right to keep from being wrongfully charged. No matter what he may or may not have done, there's no reason that LEO should have pulled him over in the first place on some bogus charge, especially if he can prove it.

Thanks Hammerhead, I was starting to wonder about daring to fight this in court. I am starting to hear some inside buzz from people who actually know this cop. He is a big fish in a small town, at least when he has his badge on. He is actually not that big of fish, but on the second string Saturday night crew, he was the big fish. The other officers that showed up were much younger. He is the type of officer that rules with his badge rather than earning the respect and appreciation of the community. That being said, he is the type of guy who needs to be stood up to.

If I put together a good defence, win or loose, right or wrong, I think the judge will respect the fact that I am working within the law and following the procedures of the court. I don't buy into this idea that a man cannot effective defend himself without a lawyer either. All it takes is a little effort. I sat in on some court proceedings, and plan to go watch some more. From what I saw, the job of Judge is pretty boring as they mostly deal with people wanting to get into some kind of deferral program, beg for mercy because of some type of hardship, or get reduced. I even saw an instance where the cop did not show up and the case was simply dropped. I think the judge would appreciate the occasional challenge or intelligent argument.

I have a feeling that when I get the stuff I requested for discovery, and listen/watch to everything going on in the foreground and background, it will be quite interesting.

 

[youngda9]

That being said, he is the type of guy who needs to be stood up to. Other people's opinion about this guy should have no bering on your case in court or your opinion to fight this. You are grasping at straws now.

If I put together a good defence, win or loose, right or wrong, I think the judge will respect the fact that I am working within the law and following the procedures of the court. Or he could be pissed off at you for wasting everyone's time and throw the book at you. I don't buy into this idea that a man cannot effective defend himself without a lawyer either. Pride cometh... All it takes is a little effort. And a lot of legal knowledge, U have it? I sat in on some court proceedings, and plan to go watch some more. From what I saw, the job of Judge is pretty boring as they mostly deal with people wanting to get into some kind of deferral program, beg for mercy because of some type of hardship, or get reduced. Gathered all this from sitting in court a couple times, interesting. I even saw an instance where the cop did not show up and the case was simply dropped. Perhaps your best strategy in this case. I think the judge would appreciate the occasional challenge or intelligent argument. He is just doing his job...you are not getting extra credit for showing up and trying to get out of something that you are clearly, and self admittadely, guilty of. Wonder if the prosecutor is reading this thread right now.

Do keep us informed of the outcome. When is your day in court?

 

[TTravis]

Do keep us informed of the outcome. When is your day in court?

I don't want to say when or where the court date is. I don't want to identify the officer either until this is all over. All I will say is I do have several more opportunities to sit in that court to watch and learn. I don't need to be an expert on the law except as it applies to defending this case. I enjoy the challenge and the reason to learn something new. I know this officer's personality won't matter in court, but it helps me to understand the overall picture. I don't think that bring up a valid point will cause the book to be thrown at me. I don't scare that easily and will be ready to take this on.

 

[revolvers&w]

Don't mix em

Do not under any circumstances mix firearms with alcohol!!1

Your drink will taste like Hoppes #9.

 

[newtothis]

You were lucky to not go to jail, .07 is enough to go to jail for a DUI/DWI. As for remimburstment for ammo, thats not going to happen (be thankful for getting your weapons back in a timely manner, and not having them returned in a damaged form).

Win,lose, or draw, he cut you slack and you should be thankful.

I'd suggest treading lightly and not making things personal; as the saying goes, give a man enough rope and he'll hang himself.

Good luck.

 

[serpicostraight]

You were lucky to not go to jail, .07 is enough to go to jail for a DUI/DWI. As for remimburstment for ammo, thats not going to happen (be thankful for getting your weapons back in a timely manner, and not having them returned in a damaged form).

Win,lose, or draw, he cut you slack and you should be thankful.

I'd suggest treading lightly and not making things personal; as the saying goes, give a man enough rope and he'll hang himself.

Good luck.

he should be thankful that supposed honest people with a badge didnt damage or steal his weapons? its getting bad when people actually expect that out of cops and are willing to tolerate it. but they did steal his ammo so i guess any other crime they commit shouldnt be a surprise.