united-states police vehicle search-and-seizure
Are cops allowed to search my car without asking for my ID first?
<p>Recently, I was pulled over for not using my blinker to pull out of a gas station late at night. In reality, it was an excuse to question me and search my car by a department that had never pulled me over and a cop I'd never met. An acquaintance claimed that I was selling prescriptions and the cop started questioning me about my (ex)boyfriend's prescription before I even had a chance to ask why I got pulled over. After 10 minutes of refusing to let him search my car, he claimed he smelled marijuana and told me he had a right to search my car even if I didn't consent. Angry, I let him search and he found nothing.</p>

<p>It wasn't until he finished searching that he asked me for my license and registration. He then ticketed me for not using my blinker and gave me a lecture about how he knows I'm selling and is watching me and it better stop.</p>

<p>My question is this: is this all legal? Especially the part where he doesn't even ask for my ID or registration until after searching my car. Clearly he knew who I was, despite the fact that I've never been in any sort of legal trouble.</p>

<p>Given the current state of law, <a href="https://law.stackexchange.com/a/224/10">police can effectively search any car they have stopped on a public road</a>.  There is no legal requirement for police to identify any person pursuant to a search of a vehicle.</p>

<p>In fact, <a href="https://law.stackexchange.com/q/16354/10">in many states the police need probable cause to detain a person and demand identification</a>.</p>

<p>You describe a situation in which you were subject to a detention and search.  In general, you have the right to remain silent when questioned by police, and to refuse to consent to searches.  If you think your civil rights were violated <a href="https://law.stackexchange.com/q/54/10">you can seek redress through the courts</a>.</p>

<p>Yes, there is no obligation for cops in any state to ask for ID before investigating a crime. Now, you could argue that he had to know you were you (by checking ID) before investigating an accusation made against you specifically, but they can look up who the car is registered to, so that is generally enough to assume the identity of the driver. And since he was acting on a report that you committed a crime, and searching your car was necessary to investigate that crime, he had enough to search your car without your consent, and could've charged you with another crime for not complying. You giving in to the search was your best option.</p>

<p>If he had no report against you, and did not smell marijuana either, then searching you based on a blind hunch, without your consent, would not be constitutional. But all else being equal, you would have consented by giving in to the threat of a forced search without consent--cops are allowed to lie and coerce. In this scenario, if you instead continued to refuse, then he would not have been able to continue your detention and search, not even for a drug-sniffing dog (Rodriguez v. United States.)</p>
