Flashlight search during nighttime traffic stop NJ

HI,

I have a question of whether a second officer had the legal right to search my vehicle with her flashlight while I was engaged with the first officer. This was in NJ. Do I have grounds for complaint if I decided to write a letter?

The other night I was stopped for "running a red light", which I did not. I responded so encredulously that the officer immediately believed me and only looked at my paperwork briefly and nodded the other (flashlight) officer away, and I was on my way. (They obviously stopped the wrong vehicle). It felt like a violation of my rights. Number one, I clearly stopped at the light, so there shouldn't have been any stop to begin with, and then having her search my vehicle without cause while I was preoccupied with the first officer really bugged me.

No violation of rights. It's a safety check (theirs) to make sure nobody's hiding in the back seat with a gun.

The officers have just as much right to look in your windows at night as they do during the day. During the day they do it without a flashlight so you don't notice it.

 By the way, the "cause" was that they pulled you over in the first place. That they thought you ran the light (even if in error) was "cause" enough to pull you over.

Thank you for your response. I had the same thoughts, but further searching led me to believe my initial instinct. And of course, any question of police authority can be easily challenged by some (even vague) reasonable cause.

While I was on this site I found this article. http://criminal.lawyer...

It can be a fine line, but to be specific to the particular incident:

It does seem as if the flashlight search was not legal actually, since there was no probable cause --no reasonable, or even hint of, danger to the officers since I was calm, congenial, polite, and cooperative with my paperwork in hand. There was no probable cause. In my situation the legal extent of the "plain sight" and "search" should have been confined to "search" of licence, registration, and proof of insurance, and me only. IF I had given them any cause to sense endangerment or had any criminal record then perhaps they had the right to search beyond the driver area, even remove me from the car and search it, none of which applied. I believe that is why the first officer signaled to the flashlight officer back to the car the moment he realized their error in stopping me...

It sounds like they made a mistake and admitted to that and let you go.

I think, in general, they have 2 or more officers at a stop, one at your window talking to you, the other one looking around for the other's safety (backup).

In the daylight, officer #2 is likely looking to find any danger inside the car in order to backup officer #1.

It's likely routine, and exactly what they a trained to do.

At night, they flash a light in to look for possible danger.

I'm not a lawyer, but it alls sounds normal to me.

Even if you are right, and they had no right to shine a flashlight in your particular direction, what were your damages here?  What is your objective in this?

TomBurke:

While I was on this site I found this article. http://criminal.lawyer...

It can be a fine line, but to be specific to the particular incident:

It does seem as if the flashlight search was not legal actually

Well, I certainly don't reach that conclusion based on the article:

http://criminal.lawyers.com/traffic-violations/Unlawful-Vehicle-Searches-and-Seizures.html

I did some googling and found some references to a "plain view" exception and some opinions that looking through the windows is not a "search." A "search" doesn't occur until the doors are opened.

Granted, I didn't find any court cases to support that but there is are lawyers that volunteer here that might explain it better.

TomBurke:

since there was no probable cause

You keep saying that. But the probable cause was the belief (later determined to be in error) that you committed a traffic infraction.

TomBurke:

no reasonable, or even hint of, danger to the officers since I was calm, congenial, polite, and cooperative with my paperwork in hand.

That's only your opinion of your demeanor during the traffic stop. The officers have no way of knowing what lies beneath that demeanor, especially at night when the inside of your vehicle is dark.

Once the officer determined that you did not commit the infraction, the traffic stop was over and that's when he waved off the other officer. Until then, it was still in progress and the officer's had a right to look through your car windows.

I'm sure that you won't agree that the officer didn't do anything wrong so let's table the argument until somebody comes by to cite a court ruling that covers it.

TomBurke:

It does seem as if the flashlight search was not legal actually, since there was no probable cause --no reasonable, or even hint of, danger to the officers

The use of a flashlight to look into your vehicle from the road was completely legal.  Just as the officer could stand beside your vehicle and look through the windows during the day, he can look through the windows with a flashlight at night to observe anything that is in plain view.  Police don't need probable cause to just look from a place they have a right to be.  The use of a flashlight "to illuminate the interior of a car, without probable cause to search the car, "trenched upon no right secured . . . by the Fourth Amendment." Texas v. Brown (1983) 460 U.S. 730, 739-740; United States v. Dunn (1987) 480 U.S. 294.

Now we have some case law:

"the officer's initial stop of respondent's vehicle was valid, and his actions in shining his flashlight into the car and changing his position to see what was inside did not violate any Fourth Amendment rights" Texas v. Brown (1983) 460 U.S. 730, 739-740

http://supreme.justia.com/us/460/730/

"shining a flashlight into a protected area, without probable cause to search the area, is permissible" United States v. Dunn (1987) 480 U.S. 294.

http://supreme.justia.com/us/480/294/

Assuming you mean the officer shined the light into the car and not that he got inside the vehicle and started moving things around, the "search" was almost certainly reasonable.

Assume this occurred during the day.  They could see into the vehicle then, right?  And that would be perfectly legal.  Using a flashlight at night doesn't trigger any problems under federal law. 

States can grant people more rights than under the US Constitution, but they usually do not.  No state that I am aware of would infringe officer safety to make this an unreasonable search and a violation of law. 

Probable cause is an exception to the warrant requirement.  Cops do not need probable cause if all they are doing is a "plain view" search, which this is.  Anything they can see, from a vantage point which they are legally allowed to occupy, is within plain view.

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."  &n... (Fourth Amendment 1891)

"The Fourth Amendment was written directly in response to British general warrants (called Writs of Assistance), in which the Crown would grant general search powers to British law enforcement official. These officials could search virtually any home they liked, at any time they liked, for any reason they liked or for no reason at all. Since many of the founding fathers were smugglers, this was an especially unpopular concept in the colonies."   (cited: About.com)

(Essentially, citizens' protection from abuse of power)

IF we allow citizens rights of privacy to blur just because an officer is "afraid" for safety every single time they do their job then we essentially can be subjected to search (intrution of privacy) " for any reason they liked or for no reason at all".

Overall:  If I can be pulled over for driving home from work for no reason at all and searched what does that say? I have been driving for 40 years and lived in many states and have been stopped at night a handful of times. I have never had a flashlight search of my vehicle; it was paperwork-related only.

Once the officer realized his error HE signaled the flashlight officer away from my car.

Instintively, I knew, and he likely sensed, the search beyond my paperwork was a violation. I do realize that there is no illegality basis since police officers have been given free reign to claim "safety" as cause. My overall point is more an observation-- this incident points out that our rights have corroded under the guise of "safety" because NOW we are allowing authority to claim that all of us are a potential danger all the time! It's like going back to 1891. That's not how I want to live, and is an example of why the people sought a new nation---to be free of such things.

Thank you all for your responses. Legally, there is no way around the situation because they have the ability to claim"potential danger:, but I think there is argument of a basic violation of the fourth amendment intent.

yes.

The 4th Amendment was written long before the invention of the automobile.  Because of its mobility, there is an automobile exception to the warrant requirement just as there is an exigent circumstances exception.  When you're in a car, you are not in your home.  You are out in public view and your rights to privacy are far less.  Further, just as an officer can look into your car through the windows during the day, whether it's following a traffic stop or simply while it's parked in a lot, he can stand outside your vehicle and shine a light into the interior.  He is not "searching," he's looking at things that are in plain view.

You made your observation and now I will make mine.

It's your opinion you were stopped for no reason, I am guessing if we questioned the police officer they initially had cause to stop you.

I find it rather unbelievable you are upset about a police officer, who is sworn to protect YOU that you are upset about something so trivial.

Do you know how many police officers are blindsided/ambushed/killed a year  by someone sitting in an automobile during routine traffic stops?

Rather than scream about your rights being violated over something so petty, why don't you be thankful all was good with you that night and you were only inconvenienced for a brief moment.

Maybe they can claim potential danger because for them that danger is a reality of their jobs.  An officer was just killed here a few weeks ago by this very same circumstance.   

TomBurke:

Once the officer realized his error HE signaled the flashlight officer away from my car.

Instintively, I knew, and he likely sensed, the search beyond my paperwork was a violation.

OR a less nefarious scenario is that once he determined that there was no reason to continue the investigation he signaled his partner they were finished and ready to move on. At which point they did. You automatically assume the worst when in reality it sounds like a routine traffic stop.  You did something that called their attention, they pulled you over, while one officer questioned you and got your documentation the other secured the scene.  I do not see any 4th Ammendment violation at all.

TomBurke:

IF we allow citizens rights of privacy to blur just because an officer is "afraid" for safety every single time they do their job then we essentially can be subjected to search (intrution of privacy) " for any reason they liked or for no reason at all".

The other issue no one has touched on is even IF the search was illegal, nothing came of it.  You were not charged nor delayed any longer than you would have been had the officer not shined the flashlight in your car.  The remedy for a 4th Ammendment violation is suppression of the evidence.  Nothing was found and no charges resulted from the flashlight illumination of the car's interior.  I fail to see what you are so upset about.

Many years ago my BF and I were stopped after midnight.  The officer did the exact same thing and waking my 3 month old daughter up in the process.  Even then I had no problem with it and for everyone's safety ASKED before going into the car to get the baby.  Traffic stops are second in danger to cops only to domestic violence calls.  Too many officers lose their lives every year from traffic stops that turn violent.  The perpetrator that turns violent at a traffic stop and gets away becomes a danger to the public, not just law enforcement.  I have no problem with a cop securing the scene for everyone's safety. 

Like the others, I'm wondering why this is so important to you.   I've been riding in and driving cars for many years; I have never seen an officer NOT shine a flashlight in a dark car, just as he/she scrutinizes the entire car visually in the daylight.  It's common practice.  IF you have nothing to hide back there, what's the big deal?

As said, rights to privacy have been addressed for over 200 years here, including the very issue you raise.  It is NOT the fist time brought up...and it was decided not to be a violation of privacy.

Time to reserve indignation for more serious, important issues; your privacy was NOT violated, whether you "feel" that way or not.  Good luck.