On what was technically Sunday morning, I briefly pulled over in front of my friend's apartment building to drop off some friends who I was out with.  They had been out drinking for awhile before I met up with them and I only had a few beers and decided to stop so I could drive everyone home safely.  After they stepped out of the car, a police car quickly pulled behind me and turned on its lights.  The officer came to my window and the first question he asked was how much did I drink that night.  I said excuse me why are you pulling me over - remember reasonable cause, he had no reason.  Anyways I passed the field sobriety test with flying colors and only blew a .029 on the Breathalyzer.  He then gave me the option to be arrested or for him to park my car over and have me walk home since I was so close.  I took the latter of the two and went home, but now my question is on what grounds could he have legally arrested me for since I was clearly fine?  I am considering legal action.
211123
Since you had a lot of clearly drunk people in your vehicle, the police officer had reason to arrest you while performing the test. However, once you passed the test it would seem the officer would need something more to take you to jail. But he didn't - so what legal action could you possibly take, since nothing unreasonable happened to you except that you decided to walk home?
670750
You are correct in your statement about when you're pulled over by any law enforcement officer.  However, if they suspect that you have something illegal in your vehicle or on your person, they DO have the obligation to ask you about it (it's called probable cause).  While you probably don't WANT to get into trouble, it's wiser to come clean than to lie.  Lying can only make matters worse.
153008
Okay, your plate light was out. What brought on the search and siezure? What was the probable cause to search? Did he smell marijuana emanating from the pipe? If the cop had no indication that you were intoxicated and just pulled you over for a lite out with no other indication for a search then you are being played. The officer should have notified you of said search and the reasons why. What state did this happen in?!
408185
You haven't provided enough information for a decent answer.\n\nIf you were arrested for DUI, and you live in a state where there is an Administrative Per Se program (DUI arrest = license suspension), you should have received paperwork at the time of your arrest telling you what you need to do for your hearing.\n\nIf you're in California, the answer to your question is yes - you have to request your hearing within ten days.
227480
It is Nation wide .08, and that was figured by the amount of impairment of drunk drivers. The law also has the right to convict a detain for levels starting at .05 with the arresting officers discretion. Most States video tape all arrests anymore, and it's almost impossible to beat. One beer can get you arrested in America anymore.
489424
If this was not his first offense, I would assume he has a probation/parole officer.  If so, have him contact his PO and turn himself in.  If it was a first time offense, call the DA and have him 'turn himself in'--he will probably be arrested on the warrant, but could be out on bail in a few hours.  Taking the first step by voluntarily surrendering will be much better for him in the eyes of a judge than being stopped for a minor traffic violation and arrested on the warrant because he got 'caught'.  Added plus is that if he is guilty--turning himself in may influence the judge's decision at sentencing.
330197
First do not drink too much and drive. If you do have a couple of beers or glasses of wine at dinner and are of average weight, you should be ok. There are charts available that can give a gauge as to how many drinks you may have in a given time period for your age, sex and weight. This is a gauge only and can be affected by amount of food in your stomach etc. \n If you are pulled over and believe that you are not impaired then the best policy is to cooperate and be polite. In most states you would have had to be pulled over for a traffic infraction or based upon reasonable suspicion of impairment (most cases of reasonable suspicion would fall into a traffic violation category anyway). Many officers are specialists in DWI stops and will conduct the stop in a certain way to gain evidence of impairment. This will include your speech, mannerisms, odor of alcohol, coherence etc. If the officer is not satisfied that you are sober upon this first encounter he may ask you to exit the vehicle. He has every right to ask the driver of a vehicle to exit the car, this was part of a Supreme Court decision. \n  He will observe how you walk and interact with him. He will then ask you to take some Field Sobriety Tests. These are standardized tests. You can refuse. However this will turn the stop confrontational. An arrest for DWI can be made by officers prior observations of your driving, and the first encounter. If the officer thought you drove poorly enough to pull you over, that is strike one in his head, an odor of alcohol is strike two, a slight stumble out of the car and a refusal to take tests will most likely end in your arrest. Again if you are confident in your sobriety cooperate and be glad someone is out there potectiong the roads from drunks, hopefully the officer will have reciprocated your kindness with his own profesionalism.
58898
He's asking about California.  \n\nThe question is nonsense, however.  Section 1538.5 of the Penal Code is the statutory mechanism that allows unlawfully obtained evidence to be suppressed (kept out of court).  A 1538.5 hearing is held at the request of the defendant to determine if the government followed "the rules" when it obtained evidence to be used against a defendant in a criminal case.\n\nFor example, if a defendant is charged with possession of drugs based on a search of his person, the defense may file a 1538.5 motion to challenge the search.  The defendant may take the position that the search was unlawful and ask the Court to exclude the evidence obtained as a result of the unlawful search.  \n\nIn Danny's case, a 1538.5 motion might be filed to contest the legality of the checkpoint, the observations of his sobriety made by the officer who initially detained him, the observations made by the officer who evaluated him and ultimately arrested him, and/or the function of the breath machine or other chemical testing procedure.  There might even be more issues, but those are the significant ones.\n\nSo while the question really doesn't make sense, it at least shows the poster has an idea of what's going on.  A 1538.5 hearing is used to determine if the government did the things it's allowed to do by law and didn't violate anyone's constitutional rights.\n\nDanny - see my other answer to your first question.  I applaud your interest in safeguarding your rights.  However, if you acknowledge (even if only to yourself) that you were driving in violation of the laws in California concerning DUI (driving a motor vehicle with a blood alcohol level of .08% or higher) then I'm left feeling like you need to accept that you potentially could have killed someone (or yourself) that night, and take your lumps.  If you think you can get off on a technicality, go for it if you want.  But really...you know if you were guilty or not, no matter what the legal beagles end up saying, and if you should be punished for making a bad decision, then take it and move on.  I know it's expensive and I know it has a *profound* impact on your life...but the impact you might have had on other lives that night makes your concerns look childish.\n\nEDIT 2/12/06: James F...I know, but that does not stop defendants from filing supppression motions against them.
283454
They can ask for your license at any time even if they spot you walking down the sidewalk doing nothing wrong.  In some states, you can demand an on site blood test.  Some states have been caught using modified breathalyzers so that they always show you are drunk.  That is why you need to ask for a blood test if stopped.
142689
It means some cop did her a big favor.  She was stopped driving a car and could not demonstrate it was her car or that she had permission to drive it.  She could have been arrested and charged with car theft.  She is probably lying about not being able to remember.  If she was that drunk, they probably would have arrested her.
368704
His search was illegal. Police can search you or your vehicle if you are arrested. They may not search your vehicle because you are on "private property". I'm not sure where these other people are getting their misinformation.\n\nIf what some of these people are saying is true, they could search every vehicle that they stop for speeding. \n\nAs a general rule, if they ask your permission, then they don't have probable cause. If they have probable cause, they don't need your permission. \n\nMy advice is to hire an attorney and sue the department for a violation of your fourth amendment rights.
284957
Doesn't matter if they read your rights or not, that will only get you out of any incriminating statements you made... Do you have a record of any kind?  If not try to get a plea deal for probation and have the charges reduced to disorderly conduct.  What area/city/state are you in?  That makes a big difference too.  If you do get infront of the judge explain how you just graduated and weren't thinking right and you know you made some bad decisions and other crap he wants to hear... and dress nicely...  Theoretically you could get jail time and have your license suspended (in PA 6 mo for posession and another 6-12 for underage alcohol...)  but, like I said, if you have a clean sheet, and your look nice and act nice and make sure the judge knows how sorry you were you should get off with a tap on the wrist... a year or two of light probation and a fine... remember though, if you get stuck with posession it follows you for the rest of you life as a drug conviction, so do whatever to get that reduced...
624968
What about the crap you would put someone through if you killed a family on the highway because of driving under the influence?  If you have a problem with alcohol - the law did to you what was in the interest of Public Safety.\n\nBefore you get your license back you will have to do the following..,\n\nTAKE RESPONSIBILITY and acknowledge you did wrong. JOIN AA and start attending. After you have been there for a while you may petition the Judge for a hearing (or talk to the city attorney to see what steps to take) and inform the Judge you are taking steps to remedy your drinking problem.\n\nIf you are not willing to pay the piper then you do not deserve to drive. I know - because I used to drink and drive and almost killed a family.  Unlike you - I felt remorse and stopped drinking.\n\nThe only way to avoid DUI is to STOP DRINKING.  You really don't need the stuff. Someone dies or critically injured on the count of selfishness on your part you could end up in prison - and a drivers license would be the least of your worries,\n\nDrinking and Driving is a criminal offense. Your attitude does little to tell anyone you taking this seriously nor that you see you did anything wrong. I hope you deal with your problem before you get your license back.
148484
If you were over 18 it will show up.  It should be in the system as a traffic violation only because in VA you could possibly get a restricted license.  It can be a misdemeanor or felony depending on the circumstances.  \n  If the question asks "Have you ever been arrested?" you better say yes because they'll find out.  Honesty is always best.
568461
Former police officer/current attorney...\n\n1-DO NOT just ignore the ticket. The majority of states have an agreement with each other to enforce traffic tickets. More than likely your state has such an agreement with the state where your ticket was written. If you fail to take care of it you may have your license suspended/revoked.\n\n2-If you wish to fight it then go to court. I realize this may be a long drive, but there are chances the officer may not show up. If the officer doesn't, then ask the court to dismiss it. Explain that you drove X amount of miles, and how much time it took. Alot of officers write tickets because they are required to generate so much activity. However, alot of officers hate going to court on their day off...which, brings me to another point. Call the police department and find out if the officer will be working the day of court (just ask if officer so-so is there, and what hours he works). If yes, he'll be in court-it will get him off the street. If no, chances are he won't show up for court-its his day off.\n\n3-If you go to court, and the officer shows up, you'll be found guilty; attorney or no attorney. The court ALWAYS gives the officer the benefit of the doubt. I know it sucks, but look at it like this...most drivers have no proof they weren't speeding. So, it comes down to the officers word against the driver. The court will side with the officer. Why? Because if they sided with the drivers the court would be packed because every driver would go to court and say, "I wasn't speeding".\n\nGood luck...
442966
The only question here is the legality of the stop.  The officer will have to be able to articulate why he stopped you and convince a judge that it was legal.  Factors such as the time of day he saw you sitting in the parking structure, any recent pertinent criminal activity in the area (car burglaries, drug dealing, etc.), exactly what movements he saw in the car, etc. will all be considered in determining whether or not the initial stop was legal.  \n\nIf the stop is deemed legal, the rest is a gimme.  Searching the car with consent, as you stated in your question, is all good.  All people in the vehicle can be charged with possessing contraband found in the car.  If someone "man's up" and claims possession, it is likely that the charges against the other parties would be dismissed.\n\nThe video from the police dash cam, if there is one, would be admissible.  Remember that it only records straight ahead and the officer could testify that what he saw was occurring out of the view of the camera.\n\nGood luck!
362116
Nope, you should go to jail for the maximum amount of time they can keep you there and loose your driver license for good.  You not only disregarded your own safety but put other innocent lives in danger when you drove drunk.  You obviously disregarded the law since you did this not once, not twice, but three times.  The third time should be the charm.  It seems this is the only way innocent people can be protected from you.  I sorry, but you get no sympathy from me regarding this behavior.