Traffic Stops

[SAPD]

Are police officers able to order the occupants of the vehicle out during a routine traffic stop and even search them physically if they wanted to, no matter how innocent they looked or how minor the offense was? Wouldn't it be safer if they did that all the time before running checks, writing citations etc. Because I would feel edgy not knowing what they might surprise me with as I approach the vehicle or while I'm processing them, like this.

[wpd11]

There is no such thing as a routine traffic stop. A officer can order individuals out of a car for any reason he wants to if he is on a traffic stop. It is not wise if there are more poeple than there are officers. Back-up officers would come on scene before having people exit the vehicle. Your answer is yes I can order a driver out of the vehicle if I was to pull him over for speeding. I then would tell the driver that I will be giving him/her a citation for speed and I need them to step from the vehicle ( I would want them to sit in the patrol vehicle with me BACK SEAT while i issue the citation). At this point I would then tell the driver that I will be performing an EXTERIOR PAT-DOWN for weapons. ( I would not enter pockets at this point ). Now I know you can do this in Ohio but I am not sure if this applies to other states or not.

[mcsap]

Keeping them all together in one place inside of the car is the easiest and safest way to keep an eye on them. I too have ordered people back in cars. Not to mention it is safer for them than to be out wandering around the road where passers by are rubbernecking at me and may run one of them over.

[Tankus]

we are able to stop search and detain any person, weather it be a traffic stop or a walk up start.....as long as we have reasonable belief that they have
1. committed and offence
2. going to committ an offence
3. are in possession of something they shouldnt

as long as there is reasonable belief....we are covered

the search included the person, vehicle, vessle, aircraft and any baggage they have or a re carrying.

[K9Cop]

As others have already stated, we can legally require the occupants to exit after initiating a traffic stop on the vehicle. If there are multiple people in the vehicle, I prefer them to remain inside until I have sufficient back-up. If there is only the driver, I prefer to have them exit the vehicle. I always ask them for permission to search their person for drugs or weapons. I then bring them to my office - my patrol car. I prefer to have people on my turf, rather then theirs, for several reasons: I don't know what kinda of weapons they may have located in their vehicle but I do know that they won't have access to any of mine while in my vehicle; I prefer to pass through that kill zone while walking to their car only once; if I'm writing a citation it enables me to conduct small talk with the person which then helps me to detect the odor of alcohol emitting from their breath when they respond; detect the smell of marijuana/heroin/crack emitting from their clothing/person and I've found it much easier to obtain consent to search (prior to working K-9) of their vehicle after I hand them their DL/citation while they are in the process of exiting my vehicle - took me awhile to get the timing down just right. I work mainly narcotics where traffic violations/vehicle violations give me the reasonable suspicion/probable cause required to delve a little deeper - most of our contacts are with suspects or customers of theirs that we have spent many hours observing from afar.

[coucousis]

To me a driver that will go out of the car upon interception is a threat.... unless I asked hom to do so and that I control the situation. It happen once in a while that nervous driver comes out of before I even have time to walk out of my cruiser.... This gets me twice more vigileant and they can be sure they will get the citation doing that. I arrested an individual that was very arrogant once and my partner pulled out his revolver because of the threat the individual represented... After calming him down... he still refused to sit in his car while I was checking his rap sheet.... So !!!!! He got for 1000$ of citation for every infractions he did... Including the 148$ one for insulting a peace officer while in duty.... (after giving him the original citation)...

DC I have noticed that you wrote that you arrested 2 drivers for coming out despite your orders to stay inside.... I tougth about that before and was wondering if an accusation of Obstructing a peace officer would stand in a criminal court??? I never tought we could arrest someone for that considering that if they don't leave the perimeter and are just walking around they are not really creating an obstruction but only making the situation more tense.
Up to now it was kind of clear that should a driver argue and refuse to sit he is looking for a lot of trouble but never tougth it could go as far as an arrest !!!!

What do you arrest them for??? Obstruction? Just curious... This wayI will know next time...:D

[mcsap]

Our courts have always sided with us when it becomes an obvious officer safety issue. A lone officer makes a stop with a carload of people and is required to make the stop area as safe as possible, prevent the stopped car from being hit by a passing car, preserve the officers own life and limb from any threats from the stopped car etc.

If I had a carload and they started piling out upon the stop , I would order them ALL back in the car on my PA system. I have done this although typically it is the driver who gets out. I IMMEDIATELY order them to get back in their car. The few times that I have had problems with drivers/passengers I arrested them for Disorderly Conduct or more often Public Intox.

The officer is in control of a traffic stop which is a criminal investigation.

Same at a crash scene, I don't normally tell the FD how to put out a fire but the scene is a POLICE incident and it is under our control. If I need them to move a truck, personnel etc, they will do so and all I have to do is ask.

[TheGodFather21]

If i stop someone just say for speeding and there licence/tag come back valid(no need to arrest) i will just write em' a ticket and be on my way.If there license comes back suspended they will get searched naturally before i put them in the back seat of the cruiser.If any occpants are in the car they will get frisked on the scene (for officer safety) for possible weapons while waiting on the wrecker to come get the car and if i feel anything while frisking the outside of the clothing that remotely feel like anykind of weapon they will be searched.

[coucousis]

:confused:

Damn DC How do you manage with 3 criminal codes and set of rules :eek:

I got most respect for what you do in three different states!!!!

Down here in Quebec , I doubt that an arrest would stand at the crown attorney office(under an obstruction charge stated in the Canadian Criminal Code).
I could probalby use a municipal by-law article to proceed with the arrest but would not be able to detain the individual... I guess the best I could do would be -- arrest .... handcuff(for safety).... write down all citations(while he is looking at me handcuffed) ... then release on the spot.... !!!!

If I'm lucky enougth I would probably get a threat from him so I could then jail him for court appearance under an accusation of uttering threat!!!!!

Other then that ... I guess I just have to be carefull should the driver refuse to go back in the car.

[mcsap]

We cover 9 municipalities and although the state laws are the same, each has their own set of local ordinances. This can be a nightmare to enforce as they differ. Curfew is either 2300, 2400 or non-existant or in one case exists but we can't cite,only warn!!!

[freedom]

You think you have a right to search any car without a reason, you sound like Hitler. In Illinois where Hitler reigns seat belts are a primary violation yet you can't even force a motorcyclist to wear a helmet. You tell me who is in the most danger me in a car or him on those 2 wheels. I should have a right to go unprotected if I pay for my insurance and don't ask you to insure me.

[Zohar]

I feel offended by your reference to Hitler. Calling anyone Hitler is not appropriate as few human beings are the awful today (there are some bad ones, but that's going too far). My guess is that your previous post was a troll post so in the future I won't respond to you...don't feed the troll guys =(

[Tankus]

freedom......

i would be very careful who you refer to and how you answer posts......

by all means disagree with things, but be careful how you word your disagreement lest you offend. i believe you have already offended some here with your first post....

not a good way to start!!!

[oscarmitre]

It's okay he's a fwit, easily dealt with.

[Doofy]

I'll say, perhaps a little too quick to put mouth into gear without first engaging brain.....if one there.