unreasonable detention?

[ferg576]

LE stopped me for a minor traffic infraction. I was then held for 45 min before being cited and sent on my way. Unreasonable?

[Waldo P. Emerson-Jones]

I'm not knowledgeable enough to answer your question, but I imagine it would help anyone who is to relate a little more info about what was going on. Were you just sitting in your car waiting? Was LE questioning you? Did you ask to leave? What was LE doing during this time period? What were you doing? Did LE tell you why it took so long? I suspect the reasonableness of any detention depends upon the circumstances and your original post doesn't give much to go on there.

[Marcus78]

It's very hard, if not impossible, to answer your question fully without more details made available. But, under Terry v. Ohio, a police officer may detain you for a reasonable amount of time provided he has reasonable suspicion. Terry involved a stop and frisk which the officer relied upon to detect weapons, but the point is you are still being detained.

I have seen people get off free even after they gave consent, AND the cop found something incriminating because they were detained for so long. But then again, I've seen it where people were detained even longer and they were convicted because the evidence was not excluded. It's very hard to tell you a yes or no answer because we go by the totality of the circumstances and it seems that any "bright line" tests become dimmer and dimmer with each passing court case.

But basically, look to these two prongs. Was 1. the initial detention reasonable? (i.e. was the stop valid) and 2. was the entire delay reasonably related to the scope/severity of the initial justification for the detention? This is one way to determine if the stop is reasonable. So, if the cop has good evidence to believe you are transporting explosives/drugs/persons, then a longer stop is probably going to be okay. But if he hits you for failure to signal, speeding, etc., then a long detention will be less likely to pass muster.

Another factor, there was a case out of a northern state, I can't recall which one off the top of my head, which held a 35-40 minute stop for a failure to properly display license plate (a mere citation) was reasonable on account of the computers going down in the squad car or at the police headquarters.

I would say that yes, the stop was unreasonable. However, there are so many factors to consider, I wouldn't endorse or put any weight behind that statement without first knowing all the relevant facts/whole story.

[instfixer]

Body language is everything!

One has to act bored, acting nervous will do you in

[acp5762]

Go to that Department's Internal Affairs Division and make a formal complaint. Keep this in mind, Police rule the streets and Judges rule the Court Room. Heres something only you can answer. Were you detained from leaving after the citation was issued or were you just detained up until that final moment when you signed the citation and then free to leave? Do you think the Officer was checking for warrants? Sometimes that information can take a little while if the computers have been down. Anyway you were there. you know how it felt, if you think you were held longer than what would be considered normal make a complaint.

[Harro69]

Why bother with this your just giving him more of your time. It's not enough and then you will risk retaliation later. Learn to pick your battles in life this is not one of them. You drove off with a ticket.. seems probably the same exact ticket if it would of taken 15 minutes for the stop. Plus if he has cam and proof then you will look like a prick to IA and any judge. Why step in dog shit when you already left it behind?

[ShysterJon]

I'm sure the total time taken with people reading and responding in this thread far exceeds 45 minutes. And the rest of us didn't even commit a traffic infraction.

My advice: Quit your bitching, man up, and move on in life.

acp: Your streak of giving bad advice continues.

[acp5762]

Originally Posted by ShysterJon

I'm sure the total time taken with people reading and responding in this thread far exceeds 45 minutes. And the rest of us didn't even commit a traffic infraction.

My advice: Quit your bitching, man up, and move on in life.

acp: Your streak of giving bad advice continues.

Your streak of passing undue judgement on people continues. You might want to consider stepping down from your self professed pedistal. If the OP had a problem with Law Enforcement performing their lawfull duty I only suggested he take it up with the proper authority. How can that be bad advice since their really isn't much anyone can do here.

[ShysterJon]

acp, you consistently post uninformed balderdash here and I will continue to point that out to members. You're not a lawyer. You know nothing about laws, legal procedures, or anything to do with the legal system other than what your dumbass sees on TV and movies.

For example, you suggest to a guy who's detained for 45 minutes during a lawful traffic stop to file a grievance with the police department. That's ridiculously stupid advice. The police are allowed to detain people while they are carrying out their legitimate functions. All that filing a grievance would do is waste more time, or worse, subject the OP to harassment by LE for filing a frivolous complaint.

Another example: You suggest the OP go to the police department's internal affairs division. Well, that would be dumb because IAD has NADA to do with investigating citizen complaints. Every police department will have a complaint review board, sometimes made up of cops only, sometimes including citizens, to review citizen complaints. Police department IADs have NOTHING to do with that.

I don't care that you're as dense as a rock, as long as you STFU. What I care about is some unsuspecting person might read the holy horseshit you post here and actually FOLLOW your advice, to their extreme detriment.

[acp5762]

Originally Posted by ShysterJon

acp, you consistently post uninformed balderdash here and I will continue to point that out to members. You're not a lawyer. You know nothing about laws, legal procedures, or anything to do with the legal system other than what your dumbass sees on TV and movies.

For example, you suggest to a guy who's detained for 45 minutes during a lawful traffic stop to file a grievance with the police department. That's ridiculously stupid advice. The police are allowed to detain people while they are carrying out their legitimate functions. All that filing a grievance would do is waste more time, or worse, subject the OP to harassment by LE for filing a frivolous complaint.

Another example: You suggest the OP go to the police department's internal affairs division. Well, that would be dumb because IAD has NADA to do with investigating citizen complaints. Every police department will have a complaint review board, sometimes made up of cops only, sometimes including citizens, to review citizen complaints. Police department IADs have NOTHING to do with that.

I don't care that you're as dense as a rock, as long as you STFU. What I care about is some unsuspecting person might read the holy horseshit you post here and actually FOLLOW your advice, to their extreme detriment.

You're more of an arrogant prick than I though. IAD is the initial investigating body of any Police Dept. They exist to Police their own. The OP's complaint probably would have been a waste of time for them,but the idea of retaliation towards him by the Police is the most absurd thing you've ever written.

[ShysterJon]

Again, you're misinformed. You write: "IAD is the initial investigating body of any Police Dept." This is ABSOLUTELY incorrect. An IAD investigates serious allegations of police misconduct. A driver cooling his heels for 45 minutes hardly qualifies as an allegation of serious police misconduct. Such an allegation would, without a doubt, be assigned to the department's review board, NOT its IAD.

If you'd get your fat ass off your couch, stop watching reruns of 'Law and Order,' quit your job as a garbageman, and work in the criminal justice system, you'd know that.

Also, if you'd ever read a police internal file (and I've read hundreds), you'd know that cops retaliate in petty ways against citizens all the time.

Again, you're a fool. Worse, you're a fool who gives foolish advice. Worst of all, you're a fool who gives foolish advice in a public forum that others may read and rely upon.

[trojantide]

I'm not a lawyer or a cop but that certainly was not required to figure out acp's advice was rediculously stupid. First of all why waste additional time and energy filing a complaint when you've already had your valuable time wasted by a cop. Secondly, to suggest there is no risk of retaliation is very naive indeed. Lawheads live to get back at people who question their authority. Why give them a reason to get back at you.
I say never call the cops and never talk to them without counsel (within reason, of course).

[acp5762]

It's pretty obvious my advice was more than any of you can understand or even handle. Thats partly due to the fear many of you have with authority. If a Police Officer is really doing something outside the realm of what might be acceptable by his/her Department to keep quiet about it for fear of retaliation is simply irresponsible. Other individuals may come in contact with that officer and could experience similar treatment or worse. Now maybe the OP's concerned seemed meanial but to him it apparently had some significance otherwise he wouldn't have posted it. The general concensus by the majority of you was for him to just suck it up and move on. I merely make a suggestion if it means that much to him make a complaint. That becomes taboo because it involves going against some hidden creed of not talking to the Police. The idea of police retaliation is beyond exaggeration. Have any of you ever done what is right even if it involves the possibility of oppositon. I would venture to say no.

[frenchlouie]

Investigations of police misconduct are not handled within the department. They are handled by an outside agency, so going to IAD would be pointless. The OP's statement says everything he was detained before being cited which is completely legal if there was reasonable suspicion (warrant search, furtive movements, high crime area especially prostitution, suspicious persons and circumstances) to justify the continued detention. I suspect there were some of those elements or else the stop would not have taken so long because most cops don't detain people unless they have some reason to justify the detention.

[ferg576]

Well, didn't mean to stir it up! Just wondering if it might have possibly been a 4th amendment issue and/or possible defense. Thank you Marcus for your informed response.