NM court rules against pretextual stops by police

Nov 4, 2008 Read more: Alamogordo Daily News 39
New Mexico's Constitution prohibits police from stopping a driver on a pretext so they can search the person's vehicle for drugs or other evidence of wrongdoing, the state Court of Appeals ruled Monday. Read more
First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Michael Morris

Chico, CA

#21 Nov 4, 2008
Steve wrote:
I do expect privacy on a public road in my private car and so should you!! Read the 4th Ammendment! Are you saying that people have no expectation of privacy as soon as they step out of their front door? You find it reasonable to be stopped and searched without cause just because you're on a public road. WOW!
It makes them feel safe since they rationalize if the cops are searching people they are safe. For that they point to how much less crime there is today than before.
Michael

Grand Rapids, MI

#22 Nov 5, 2008
LandS wrote:
Something just not right here. A drug task force officer not allowed to tell the cop? That is just plain stupid.....especially if they had been watching that house. He should have been stopped anyhow for no seatbelt.
You people obviously don't know the law just inject your smart ass remarks on line!
Bruce Woodhull

Albuquerque, NM

#23 Nov 5, 2008
The irony in the decision is that a New Mexico court rules on the law as defined by the New Mexico State Constitution, but in matters involving federal expansion of authority and jurisdiction in the state, New Mexico courts typically ignore the State Constitution and bow to federal authority.
on the road again

Alamogordo, NM

#24 Nov 5, 2008
The Federal 10th circuit court of appeals has alreadt issued a ruling on pretexual stop see US vs jesus magallanes in 1998 was stopped for speeding after a cop radioed ahead to another advising of the possiblilty of drugs.
Gordon Mast

Ontario, CA

#25 Nov 5, 2008
Steve wrote:
You still don't get it. The point of the decision was "pretextual", meaning an "appearance assumed in order to disguise the real intention". Maybe it has to happen to you before you "get it". There are so many laws in this country that I guarantee you are breaking at least one of them every day and you don't even know it. Given the "right" circumstances, any of you could get caught up in something just because of a pretextual police inquiry. Be careful what you wish for. Do you want the police to have the power to stop you for anything they deem as a pretext to investigate you further. If so, then there's nothing else I can say. And no, I'm not a dealer, paranoid, or the victim of my own bad choices. I love people who can't debate without attacking. It reveals much about their character and intelligence.
Steve,

save your breath, the Liberals can't help themselves and the general public really believes it when they hear "We are the Government and we are here to help you"

All most people hear is what they were trained to hear, and the truth totally eludes them.
my2sense from alamogordo

Albuquerque, NM

#26 Nov 5, 2008
We cannot continue to passively surrender our rights until we eventually have none left. One of the previous posters made an excellent point about government being answerable to the people, not the other way around.

For those of you that arrogantly insist that "if the police stop (question,search,arrest, etc.) you they must have a good reason, therefore you must be guilty." (Believe it or not, this outdated, ridiculous attitude seems to be slyly alive and accepted here.) tell me please, how do you excuse the corrupt officers that abuse the power they have been given? I suspect most of you think "as long as it's not me who cares" right? But what protection would you have or expect in this scenerio?

I'm asking you to stop and seriously consider for a moment if it were you. The results of being unjustly accused of anything are often devestating; financially, emotionaly, professionaly. An eventual "sorry, you're free to go" does little to repair the damage.

IMO the police must work within even more stringent restrictions in dealing with the public they are charged with protecting.
PLaya7

Las Cruces, NM

#27 Aug 20, 2011
The cops don't have the right to harrass people for assumption. Officers are misusing there athority if you ask me make pretexuaul stops unconstitutional.
bob

Artesia, NM

#28 Aug 20, 2011
Steve wrote:
I do expect privacy on a public road in my private car and so should you!! Read the 4th Ammendment! Are you saying that people have no expectation of privacy as soon as they step out of their front door? You find it reasonable to be stopped and searched without cause just because you're on a public road. WOW!
you've signed over many basic human rights when you "ask" for a driver's license. if you get a dwi, they confiscate your license BEFORE you go to trial. so much for presumed innocence. unless, of course, if you're married to a cop. or one of his little bastards. or his puta. or hees carnal. or hees homie, etc, etc...
Vatoloco4ever

United States

#29 Aug 22, 2011
So if you visit a friend or family member who is doing something illegal but you know nothing about their biz, then theese idiots are saying that it gives cops the right to watch or pull over / search their vehicles? Thats stupid . Everybody knows somebody who does something illegal whether they realize it or not.
Sons of Liberty

Oak Creek, WI

#30 Aug 23, 2011
Unless there is damage to someone or something...there is no crime.

Why do you embrace a military government?

Silly slaves.
gooddecision

Carlsbad, NM

#31 Sep 1, 2011
PinkFloyd wrote:
Wow, I have been pulled over before and nothing magical was found in my vehicle. How paranoid are you Steve? Perhaps you should seek therapy for that.
i was stopped by almo police coming into alamo on 70 from cruces.....
the pretest was that i did not dim my lights BULL

i was stopped on hwy 82 by nm patrol who had chosen to ride just behind me putting his lights in my side mirror....
his pretext was that i did not dim my lights withing 2oo' of oncoming vehicle.... BULL

These stops waste my time and are a harassment of the people of NM
davy

Albuquerque, NM

#32 Sep 2, 2011
Down with freedom! Sieg Heil!!!!!
Mr Know it all wrote:
Great way to make it harder on the good guys, trying to keep us safe and drugs off the street. Thanks to you the great state of NM for tying their hands. Blaahhhh
Presexual Stopper

Santa Fe, NM

#33 Sep 6, 2011
gooddecision wrote:
<quoted text>
i was stopped by almo police coming into alamo on 70 from cruces.....
the pretest was that i did not dim my lights BULL
i was stopped on hwy 82 by nm patrol who had chosen to ride just behind me putting his lights in my side mirror....
his pretext was that i did not dim my lights withing 2oo' of oncoming vehicle.... BULL
These stops waste my time and are a harassment of the people of NM
Duh. He was checking to see if your were his type as a "pretest" for cruiser hood sex.
searches

Santa Fe, NM

#34 Sep 6, 2011
So do the people in these phony excuse traffic stops consent to have the car searched ? You should force them to obtain a search warrant to see what probable cause they list in the warrant versus the reason you are told they stop you. Judges do NOT like being lied to and having a document signed by them in front of an appelate court. I have been stopped a few times because a cop couldn't see my seatbelt was on, which it was. Not one has ever asked if they could search the car.
Former LE in anther state

Alamogordo, NM

#35 Sep 10, 2011
searches wrote:
So do the people in these phony excuse traffic stops consent to have the car searched ? You should force them to obtain a search warrant to see what probable cause they list in the warrant versus the reason you are told they stop you. Judges do NOT like being lied to and having a document signed by them in front of an appelate court. I have been stopped a few times because a cop couldn't see my seatbelt was on, which it was. Not one has ever asked if they could search the car.
Once the officer found his reason for the stop was invalid any other action would stand a chance of probably being thrown out in court. That is why they probably didn't waist their time with a consent search. At least where I came from the judge was particular about this.

In some states, including the one I worked in for close to two decades, a stop for a seat belt violation alone was illegal. It could not be used for the primary or sole reason for the stop.

Now, I'll say this. I do not know anything about NM LE but I know for a fact that there are corrupt officers in some localities who make up their own probable cause. I never did it and I am proud to say that, but I did see it on more than a few occasions and even reported the things I saw. Unfortunately, to no avail.

I have the utmost respect for law enforcement every where as long as they have the utmost respect for the rights of the citizens they protect and respect for the oath they took.
just saying

Roswell, NM

#36 Sep 17, 2011
It is my opinion that all of you that are complaing about Law enforcement will be th first ot call on them then bad mouth them when you need them and they don't show up as quickly as you like or?? Give me a break. http://www.alamoeasyads.com
Pinky

Huachuca City, AZ

#37 Sep 18, 2011
Vatoloco4ever wrote:
So if you visit a friend or family member who is doing something illegal but you know nothing about their biz, then theese idiots are saying that it gives cops the right to watch or pull over / search their vehicles? Thats stupid . Everybody knows somebody who does something illegal whether they realize it or not.
Right on logic!!!
bob

Hobbs, NM

#38 Sep 19, 2011
Former LE in anther state wrote:
<quoted text>
Once the officer found his reason for the stop was invalid any other action would stand a chance of probably being thrown out in court. That is why they probably didn't waist their time with a consent search. At least where I came from the judge was particular about this.
In some states, including the one I worked in for close to two decades, a stop for a seat belt violation alone was illegal. It could not be used for the primary or sole reason for the stop.
Now, I'll say this. I do not know anything about NM LE but I know for a fact that there are corrupt officers in some localities who make up their own probable cause. I never did it and I am proud to say that, but I did see it on more than a few occasions and even reported the things I saw. Unfortunately, to no avail.
I have the utmost respect for law enforcement every where as long as they have the utmost respect for the rights of the citizens they protect and respect for the oath they took.
well said, sir.

Since: Jun 08

Location hidden

#39 Oct 7, 2011
The police can search my car when I can search theirs....

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Pecos Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Stolen Van Gogh found in NM shop (Sep '09) Apr 16 Just Me 75
Racial profiling by Facebook against Natives, w... Apr 14 just sayin 2
a WMD is a pressure cooker Apr 12 Male 1
News New Mexico VA clinic among nationa s worst for ... Apr 9 ohhhbs 1
UDV, Santo Daime (Dec '10) Apr 7 Darkstar01 14
Were You Abused by a Catholic Priest? Mar 30 nmpriestabuse 1
News Unemployment rate rises for NM cities as other ... (Jul '13) Mar 29 Windy 394
More from around the web

Pecos People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]