Kenneth,
Nice reference but. . .
Refusing to grant one's permission, in the absence of any physical
resistance, does not resist, delay or obstruct the officer in his duties.
Thus PC 148 should not apply.
However, while refusing to grant permission does not physically impair the
officer from doing whatever it is he wants to do, it does make him think
twice about doing it, which is usually enough.
Regards,
-----Original Message-----
From: Kenneth Allan Mitchell [mailto:nokones@kenmitchell.com]
Sent: Friday, August 10, 2001 20:26
To: Michael R. Clements
Cc: John J. Stimson-III; jeff; ba-autox@autox.team.net
Subject: Re: Fw: CA Special Alert
Don't forget 148 pc
"Michael R. Clements" wrote:
>
> Thanks for the VC reference.
>
> It says drivers are required to submit to any "lawful order" and any
"lawful
> inspection". It doesn't mean you have to do everything a police officer
> tells you to do. The key word here is "lawful".
>
> For example, _if_ (I repeat, "if") VC section 2814 is a violation of
> "unreasonable search" provisions in the Federal Constitution, or a
violation
> of the presumption of innocence guaranteed by the Federal Constitution,
then
> Federal law overrides state law and the inspection is no longer lawful.
> Thus, the driver need not submit.
>
> One can also question what it means to "submit". When I have been
subjected
> to this kind of thing in the past, I did not physically resist their
attempt
> to search me or my car, but I told them they did not have my permission to
> do so. When one refuses to grant permission, but makes no physical
> resistance, is this considered failure to submit?
>
> The officers told me to continue on my way without searching me or my car.
> Maybe they were nice guys, maybe their commanding officers told them to do
> that to avoid bad press or possible lawsuits. Or maybe I just looked
> innocent and sober and it wasn't worth their time to deal with me.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ba-autox@autox.team.net
> [mailto:owner-ba-autox@autox.team.net]On Behalf Of Kenneth Allan
> Mitchell
> Sent: Friday, August 10, 2001 19:30
> To: Michael R. Clements
> Cc: John J. Stimson-III; jeff; ba-autox@autox.team.net
> Subject: Re: Fw: CA Special Alert
>
> Please read 2800 and 2814 vc
>
> "Michael R. Clements" wrote:
> >
> > Personally, the portion of the law that I would contest is if officers
can
> > do it indiscriminately. In general, the law should require that no
officer
> > can ever detain anybody at any time, unless the officer has a "damn good
> > reason". This would include (a) a warrant, or (b) probable cause.
> >
> > In the example you give, the clouds of thick smoke would constitute
> probable
> > cause. A general roadblock does not meet either of these conditions and
> > should thus be illegal (IMO, of course).
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-ba-autox@autox.team.net
> > [mailto:owner-ba-autox@autox.team.net]On Behalf Of John J. Stimson-III
> > Sent: Friday, August 10, 2001 10:51
> > To: jeff
> > Cc: ba-autox@autox.team.net
> > Subject: Re: Fw: CA Special Alert
> >
> > Huh. So it is the opinion of the NMA that if a cop sees a car going
> > down the road pouring forth thick clouds of smoke, it should be
> > illegal for the cop to pull that car over?
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 10, 2001 at 08:43:03AM -0700, jeff wrote:
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Eric Skrum (National Motorists Association)"
<nma@motorists.org>
> > > To: "National Motorists Association" <nma@motorists.org>
> > > Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2001 12:31 PM
> > > Subject: CA Special Alert
> > >
> > >
> > > > Dear CA Members,
> > > >
> > > > A program is being implemented by the State of California which
should
> > > cause
> > > > concern to all motorists and vehicle owners. A section in the
> California
> > > > Vehicle Code, Health and Safety Code section 44081, allows your car
to
> > be
> > > > stopped for a smog equipment and emissions inspection. This was
> recently
> > > > reported by NMA member Nestor Valdes. On June 27, in Camarillo, a
> > > roadblock
> > > > was set up and vehicles were pulled over for inspection and testing.
> The
> > > > actual wording in the code says "The procedures may include
pullovers
> > for
> > > > roadside emissions testing and inspection."
> > > >
> > > > If this concerns you, and it should, please take action by
> communicating
> > > > your thoughts to the Governor and to your elected representatives in
> the
> > > > California Senate and in the Assembly. We need to jump on this
> quickly,
> > > > before it spreads to all areas of the State. In your letters,
e-mails,
> > and
> > > > phone calls, please reference the above California Vehicle Code #
> 44081.
> > > >
> > > > You can visit http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/index.html to find the
contact
> > > > information for your elected representatives.
> > > >
> > > > You can visit http://www.ca.gov/state/portal/myca_homepage.jsp to
find
> > the
> > > > Governor's home page and his contact information.
> > > >
> > > > Thank you
> > > >
> > > > Jim Thomas
> > > > CA Activist
> > > > fastestdog@prodigy.net
> >
> > --
> >
> > john@idsfa.net John Stimson
> > http://www.idsfa.net/~john/ HMC Physics '94
>
> --
> Kenneth Allan Mitchell
> mailto:nokones@kenmitchell.com
--
Kenneth Allan Mitchell
mailto:nokones@kenmitchell.com
|