Mere Field Inquiry / Suspended Driving Arrest

episode

Street Cop Podcast not yet transcribed

▲ 0

Transcript

This episode hasn't been transcribed yet Upvotes decide what gets transcribed next — 0 so far. Sign in to upvote

More from Street Cop Podcast

Episode 1027: From Tragedy to Resiliency - Susan Snow’s Journey 57 min · 01 Sep 2026

Episode 1026: Inside the Future of Police Off-Duty Management with Augustus Hellwich 38 min · 09 Jul 2026

All episodes from Street Cop Podcast →

Report any issue

Source

Recorded31 Aug 2021

Publisheranchor.fm ↗

Handlerec:531610

Show notes

In this archive episode, Dennis takes a call and answers questions live about mere field inquiry of stopped vehicles and arresting for driving while suspended. Recorded on 07/31/2017. State v Sloan 2008 Leaving a vehicle to be driven by a passenger or a third party allows you the right to check their driving credentials. (Criminal Wants / Warrants) This also allowed police officers to run warrant checks of passengers without Reasonable Suspicion. The police do not need reasonable suspicion before they access the NCIC database. An NCIC check by the police is not a search under the federal or state constitutions. HELD: During a motor vehicle stop, the passenger, like the driver, is seized under the federal and state constitutions. Police do not need reasonable suspicion before they may access the NCIC database and, because accessing the NCIC database was within the scope of the traffic stop and did not unreasonably prolong the stop, there was no basis to suppress the evidence found. http://caselaw.findlaw.com/nj-supreme-court/1146795.html?fbclid=IwAR3y01tmDepEjRtAE-HdDOZwwmFSl_5h6csCs8N35Ben1oTqoB8v6FNk17o (http://caselaw.findlaw.com/nj-supreme-court/1146795.html) State v. Sirianni 2002 Judged by this standard, the police officer's action in requesting identification from defendant required no constitutional justification. https://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fcaselaw.findlaw.com%2Fnj-superior-court-appellate-division%2F1152195.html%3Ffbclid%3DIwAR3SpeKQXQhxAZ9BQ5CAF3bHfLNZi-OvtLsjWvForkZxdukTFebTVr6KylEandh=AT1-DfyTos4YksZbsdrvqiY3zFjHYayeycGz5uwjWL2VVfuhfVmYGaovR-aLNDXSHvGs6DtsVWc_nIL5bbsv980pxyXpQZTpzDV-5BfbF3jDW8AaHWxGghF-ApTtNGUOIgand__tn__=-UK-R (http://caselaw.findlaw.com/nj-superior-court.../1152195.html) State v Pierce 1994. There are “Other sources of law” that suggest that an officer’s authority to arrest under 39:5-25 is, and should be, restricted to those offenses in which, “AN ARREST IS NECESSARY TO PROTECT PUBLIC SAFETY OR TO ASSURE THAT THE OFFENDER WILL RESPOND TO A SUMMONS!” (SOMEONE WITH NO IDENTIFICATION and YOU CAN’T FIGURE OUT WHO THEY ARE!) https://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.newjerseycriminallawattorney.com%2FAutomobile-Stop-Case-Law-State-v-Pierce.shtml%3Ffbclid%3DIwAR33iuIyhWWutwKJ6b4JxabC40UqqUb6fUstqPcLLwP-Mpgrn0_27NO1VHwandh=AT1_YDEZI9fU2ONPAhnoCCxbSn6M4uvNSu-iGJB4kAKtc1zo2OPItn5RR3LEwn24qKAb6NBF1_lz_s22TAz2vfkNX4VM7p0ekDKsRcn-dIZnfLZY25v_MaKNfLsclRlOJAand__tn__=-UK-R (http://www.newjerseycriminallawattorney.com/Automobile...) Rules of the Court Rules 3:3-1(c); 7:2-3(b) https://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/attorneys/assets/rules/r7-2.pdf?fbclid=IwAR2UmpdjZv6vqM47YjBOaS5sDa1jSJhDCbB-tmyt0wQsmgeJm808hltPquE (https://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/.../assets/rules/r7-2.pdf)

Ask this episode

“What did the council decide on item 42?” — answered with the speaker and the moment.