ARFcom LEO's...

Let's say the officer calls a K-9 in, and it false alerts for drugs (it happens, and there are no drugs in the truck.)
That's probable cause for a vehicle search.  So be it.

How far can the search go?  Can I be forced to open the vault?  Will they impound my truck and force it open?  Would they need a warrant to go that far?

You might ask, "Why wouldn't you just open the vault?"

Answer: There are guns, ammo for them, and a gas mask.  Nothing illegal, so those shouldn't be an issue.  But there are also bolt cutters and a Halligan, which might be seen as burglary tools. They're not, they're emergency rescue tools, but I can foresee a case where a cop might arrest me, and I'd have to argue my case in court.

If I complied with the original request to unlock the vault, would that help or hurt my case if I did get arrested for having 'burglary tools'?  My inclination would be to not comply with the unlock order, while standing by for a search of the rest of the vehicle.

If it matters, a search of my arrest record would turn up nothing but an arrest for not having insurance back in 1982.  I'm a law abiding citizen.

First of all, it’s unlikely LE would even run a dog on you....unless you have a local drug history or like spending time at known drug houses. When we do run a dog, we already have a reason for wanting to run the dog. Now we have to get the dog there in time before the conclusion of the stop (unless there is additional info that allows us to extend the time of the stop). So, despite the worst fears of police K9s of some posters here, it’s unlikely you would ever see a police dog do a free air sniff of your vehicle.

But, let’s say you do get a dog alert on your vehicle.....yes we can search it. We have dealt with the exact scenario you described numerous times. We’d simply remove the locked case and set it away from the vehicle. Then run the dog on it. If no hits, then case goes back in the vehicle and if nothing else, off you go. If the dog hits, then we would seize the case and write a search warrant for it. We could likely force it open roadside but case law in my area isn’t crystal clear....so we’d get a search warrant.

My agency has quite a few K9s and one in particular is a VERY proactive officer. He has tons of bites, tracks, and sniffs. Incredible dog and handler. He stops a lot of cars.  Guess what....he doesn’t use his K9 to sniff every car he stops....probably sniffs 10% of the cars he stops.....and in each case it’s not random.....he has a clearly articulable reason for deciding to use his dog. Contrary to popular opinion around here, his dog doesn’t alert every time either. He alerts a lot because he stops a lot of dopers but not every time.

Most people who are terrified of police K9s know nothing about them and how they are used but they talk about them like they are experts. If you ever hear someone use the term Ouji dog....you can be certain they know nothing about what they are talking about and are dumb as shit.

In every case we make for possession of burglar tools....there is more than just simple possession of some tools. Anyone who has tools probably has what it takes to break into a house. We routinely stop construction workers with vehicles and trailers packed full of “burglars tools” but they don’t get arrested or charged with possession of burglars tools. Catalytic converters theft is huge where I am (well pretty much everywhere). We routinely stop cars with known thieves in the vehicles and we see a cordless cut off saw and new metal cutting blades. We know what they are doing but unless we can come up with more evidence against them, it sucks but they leave with the tools.

Search is good for all containers, whether locked or not. If you won't open locked containers they can and will be forced open roadside.

Here... circumstances surrounding the stop play into Possession of Burglary Tools. What you described wouldn't even come close to such a charge absent other facts and circumstances.

Your chances of having a dog walk your car depends on the local attitudes of the cops. Some are heavy handed and do as many dog walks as possible whereas some are more reserved. The fact is... it's a numbers game... the more you interact with people the more crime you will discover.

Many times, looks don't mean squat. In 25 plus years of doing this job I've seen successful hits on cars I'd have lost a bet on and just the opposite. I've arrested or seen arrested just about every profession from LE to school teachers, Doctors, Nurses, Lawyers, etc. Hell, you never know...

Our resident barrister may disagree with you.

@Aimless.





So you don't need a warrant to break into a locked/secured container?

No.

Interesting.  Learn something new everyday.  Do these concerns/suspicions have to be articulated to a supervisor or can any patrol officer just tear apart a vehicle?

"Tear apart"... where did that come into play? The topic is forcing open a locked container, not tearing a car apart... although in certain circumstances that can and does happen.

Warrantless searches are covered under The Carroll Doctrine. "Generally speaking" if there is PC to search a car no warrant is needed.

There are exceptions... such as the car being seized or impounded, then a warrant is needed as it's no longer mobile... the police have care and control over the car, time and mobility, which Carroll was based on, no longer are issues. Like already posted, officers may choose to secure the container and seek a warrant, but it's not "required" per se.

You might be shocked to know many agencies will also force open locked containers when they tow or impound vehicles to facilitate an "inventory".

Others may very well disagree with what I posted and that's fine because some places grant more protections under the law, which is fine as well.

ETA- yes, individual officers are impowered to search vehicles under Carroll, no supervisor approval needed.

Searches are in fact intrusive. We train our folks to keep in mind not all searches will turn up contraband. Sometimes, while acting in good faith, you will eventually search someone who is completely innocent... so TREAD CAREFULLY as how you conduct the search and your entire interaction with the citizen will make a difference in how the citizen leaves/views the encounter. Like already mentioned, not every hit results in a successful search. Dogs are not 100%.

Obviously I can't physically stop a cop from searching or forcing open containers (without causing other problems anyway), but I sure as shit would never consent to it.  The courts may have said you don't need a warrant, but the Constitution still says you do.  A judge's decree doesn't make it right, even if it makes it legal.

Yep... those damn "exceptions" Judges and Lawyers keep coming up with sure screws things up.

The vault is bolted to the floor of the truck, so it couldn't be 'sniffed' outside of the vehicle.  I would think that would make it part of the vehicle, as opposed to, say, a locked suitcase.

The Carroll Doctrine clarifies things.  In this hypothetical situation, IF a dog alerted, it sounds like the vault could be forced opened at the scene as part of the PC vehicle search.  The question is, though, what happens if the vault can't be forced open roadside.  Does that in and of itself lead to impounding the truck for a warrant search?

Thanks for the clarification about the tools in the vault not automatically being viewed as burglary tools.

Out of curiosity:  Have you ever used the bolt cutters &/or Halligan in an emergency situation - as in you witnessed a car wreck or drove by a burning house?

It’s impossible to give a blanket statement. A non removable case would be directly sniffed by the dog and if the dog alerts then we have a decision to make. A dog can hit on the car and then narrow down the location of the source of the odor further once inside the car. I won’t go into any more detail on K9 tactics on a public forum. For my agency, a supervisor will make the final call. It will vary in every case whether we search the vehicle roadside or impound it and write a warrant or in some cases a supervisor may not feel there’s enough there to justify further action and direct the officer to release the person. The totality of the circumstances will dictate our actions.  There are many factors that come into play when making supervisor level decisions.  Search and seizure is a complex topic that even lawyers can’t agree on.  Also what comes into play is how much leeway your local judges and prosecutors give you. Some areas are more restrictive than Supreme Court decisions. So, it will always vary to some degree.

You are entitled to your own opinion but you are not entitled to your own made up facts. We all have opinions but until you become an appeals court justice and/or a Supreme Court justice, your opinions on what’s constitutional is meaningless. You and I don’t get to make up what we think the Constitution means regardless of our strongly held opinions. You opinion means nothing because it carries no legal weight. I’m sure that will hurt your feelings but fuck your feelings. Facts are all that matters.

United States v. Ross

Ross further clarifies that when a PC search is conducted of a vehicle, then that includes any and all containers within that vehicle.

The real issue is PC, and the mental gymnastics a cop might put himself through to get to what he thinks is probable. Cameras in cars would seem to make it a lot harder to get the gold medal in that gymnastics event nowadays.

No.

I've never used the fire extinguisher either.

Nor have I've used my gun to defend myself.

Attached File

The threshold for a K9 going around a vehicle also varies by state.  Here in Minnesota, you have to have a reasonable articulable suspicion to walk a dog around a vehicle.  There has to be some articulation of why the officer needed to walk the dog around the car, and it can’t just be because it fell within the time frame of the traffic stop.  The K9 officer is the one that determines whether a dog can go around the vehicle, and not the investigating officer if they are different.  

I’m not a fan of letting people search my stuff either, but if the police tell you that you have no choice, refusing to allow them access will make things more difficult and the end result will be the same, but with more issues relating to either A.) your property being damaged, or B.) you getting charged with obstructing.  There is a way to make it known that you are not consenting, but not get your vehicle damaged or taken and held for several days.  You can take issue with this legally on the back end.  
In the case of this scenario, if I were the stopping officer, we had a reason to go around the vehicle with the dog, and the dog hit on your truck vault, and you refused to open it, we would just impound your vehicle to our impound lot and put an investigative hold on it until an investigator could get a warrant. They will then go into the vehicle and cut or pry the vault open.  If the vehicle gets damaged in the process, oh well.  We now have a warrant to force that box open, and we’re not going to pay for anything we damage in the process.  We’ve done this with hides in dashboards where we’ve dismantled dashboards to get to guns or drugs, and then release the car back to the defendant completely ripped apart and told them to pound sand when they wanted it repaired (if the vehicle wasn’t held as evidence).

Realistically, the only reason an officer would have a reason to run a dog around your car is if you give them a reason to.  This involves things like driving in known drug areas, or having the inside of your vehicle smell like weed when it’s illegal.  Or having friends in the car who are known to police, and not in a good way.  

Also, the likelihood of a false hit by a properly trained dog is minuscule.  I won’t go into detail about the established legal requirements relating to dog training and documentation, many of which are SCOTUS cases, but suffice it to say that it’s a rarity and indicative of a dog that likely isn’t trained well.  Which means you will have additional assistance with legal recourse later.  



Given the proliferation of police body cameras, this isn’t something you’d want to rely on.  The courts have consistently upheld that PC is based on an officer articulating conditions and observations based on their training and experience.  Greater credibility is given to officer experience vs inexperience (veteran vs rookie), and history of success of that officer in the past regarding investigations.  This is why with K9s, their detection and success rates are internally tracked and used as evidence.  When we got body cams, our prosecution and conviction rates actually increased because prosecutors and defense attorneys could see what we saw.  Hard to question the credibility of an officer when the video shows drug paraphernalia all over the vehicle.  The premise that video will reduce police effectiveness and vindicate citizens to erroneous claims or questionable investigative tactics is pretty common, and we heard them.  The community members who demanded body cams said it would bring about needed accountability.  It was less than a year with body cams before those same people were demanding that body cams be taken away because they were unfair to suspects and showing them in a negative light and unfairly influencing the courts.  The cams showed the exact opposite of what they were claiming.  Internal Affairs investigations into civilian complaints immediately went up to a 95% immediate clearance rate because they could immediate watch body cam video and determine no policy or criminal violation of the officer, as claimed.  In essence, video backfired on the people demanding it.  

Dumbest shit I’ve read today.

https://www.fletc.gov/sites/default/files/imported_files/training/programs/legal-division/downloads-articles-and-faqs/research-by-subject/4th-amendment/lockedcontainers.pdf

We have looked at several legal principles that may or may not allow government intrusion into locked containers. The central feature of this question is to understand why the officer is intruding into protected areas. The law enforcement officer should always remember that the courts will look upon any search conducted without a warrant with suspicion. Oftentimes, the law enforcement officer can dismiss these issues by simply obtaining a valid consent to conduct the search. When a warrant or consent is not obtainable there are few justifications for opening a locked container. These justifications are limited to containers encountered during a mobile conveyance (Carroll) search, an inventory search and those within an arrestee’s immediate control. Otherwise, it is probably best to refrain from opening the locked container.

According to Nancy Grace duct tape and zip ties are a rape kit!

Where are cops stopping cars anymore?  And k-9 sniffs for a drug charge that's getting a declined prosecution dismissal at first appearance?  

That's a good way to actually come into contact with a criminal and have to make an arrest.  That sounds like a good chance of a use of force or racial profiling complaint.  That's how you end up on trial for murder or have to resign even after a GJ and DOJ Civil Rights investigation clears you of any wrong doing.

No thanks.  It's safer to slow roll to a 911 call and write a report for the insurance company and to build positive relationships with the community by smiling and waving.

I say this shit to rookies all the time.  There’s always a few that seem to not figure it out.  Enough attention by the civilian review board eventually changes that and they start to get why it’s just not worth it anymore.

Enjoy your crime wave. The citizens can enjoy the mess they have demanded.

@UnaStamus

Thanks.  Very thorough and well-written reply.  Sounds to me like you might be a lot higher up the ladder than a patrol officer.

EDIT: No disrespect intended towards any patrol officers here.

Watch "Audit the Audit" on YouTube.

Cops get PC challenged a lot, and lose.

And you doubled down. Going for a third idiotic post?

How much time do you have in court testifying? Don’t bother responding....I’m sure it’ll be something stupid.

What if you had a locked vault on your person?

These aren't my pants.  This isn't my lockbox.

I’m not smashing open any locked containers on the side of the road.

Either I’m asking for them to open it, taking the container if it can be removed or taking the car for a warrant to smash it open later.

But knowing how it’s 2021, the juice isn’t worth the squeeze anymore. Could care less what’s inside it anyways.

No problemo, but I’m just your average 14 year patrol grunt.  I am also an elected union director for a large metro police union, so I have to know policy, procedure and SOPs for all the units in the department, along with case law best practices and state requirements and restrictions.  I’ve spent my share of time with officers in IA, civilian review board and in front of civil attorneys.  With regard to K9, it’s probably the highest liability position in the department and has the highest potential for officers/handlers to get jammed up, so I’ve had to learn our K9 unit’s SOP manual along with knowing the surrounding case laws.

I again vote for you to be room moderator.

Thread legal:

You're asking the wrong question, IMHO. Fact is, police will get to the bottom of the issue. If that means taking a tire tool to your truck vault, so be it.

The answer to the bigger question is: what did you say, and what did you do to arrive at the point that patrol officers want to call other officers, wait on a k9, write out an affidavit, write a report, dump your crap on the side of the highway, and sweat their nuts off for what will turn out to be nothing? What did you lead them to believe they would find?

There are quite a few people that have impressive weapons and other things. I've seen vaults in other citizens vehicles (not on a traffic stop). A doctor comes to mind, that guy has everything. I've also seen them in jewel/gold type people's rides, and one medical equipment salesman. (shrugs)

A quick way there is; do you have any weapons in the vehicle? Then, you make them (or the law somehow requires) them to secure the weapons until the conclusion of the stop.

Another way there is to be doing something you shouldn't, then be acting in a manner a reasonable person wouldn't. That might get them there.

If you are slightly friendly, handle the matter at hand, even if it means pressing hard with their throwaway pen, the odds that you wind up at that point are slim.

Your question is cocked up as it relies on a falsity to get you to that point. If the dog is dicked up and alerts, or the handler is dicked up and thinks she sees an alert, then, how can we say what would happen next? You provide a clue when you say 'I'm not opening it' when they say, 'what the fuck are you doing with that box with a punch button lock on it? That's what our swat guys use. Are you a SWAT guy?'

Refusing to be assistive in an investigation is not legal grounds to intensify a search, or steer an investigation. A better response is 'work tools, and I don't want everybody driving by to see what I got in there'. Not fessing up creates this giant question mark over that box like a video game. If you've presented yourself professionally, it might be let go. But coupled with a bunk sniff, that thing is coming open, one way or another.

As an aside;

I am a pretty good mechanical breacher. There is no real use for a giant pair of bolt cutters in an emergency. I've been responding to all kinds of emergencies for 30+ years now, and can't articulate why I'd have those with me besides... I'm a breacher.
On the other hand, there is a ton of uses for a halligan tool. You didn't ask, but if you aren't a guard, the selection of things you keep in there would be curious. (I note you didn't mention body armor, or water, or food, or rope, or... I don't know. Just spitballing here at this point.)

The only thing I haven't had when I really REALLY needed it were a set of fire-resistant firefighting gloves. That would make more sense than bolt cutters.

Oh well, off topic lol. TLDR: if the dog has had to be brought out, and it hits, and especially if it alerts where the scent could drop from where your vault is, that thing is coming open one way or another, and it is very legal and court defensible, whether you agree to it or not.

lol maybe tape the business card of the local cutthroat gets-all-the-dui-and-drug-cases-off attorney to it, like a talisman.

Why would I be to the point that I would notice a locked vault on your person? Answering that illuminates what might happen next

For a time I kept a 3 foot long pipe in my trunk, used as a "cheater bar" to get lug nuts off.  Due to differential metal corrosion, by the time I had my lug nuts on tight enough not to come loose in 2 miles, I needed a cheater bar to get the nuts off.

(Now I clean my hubs and wheels with a wire brush when I rotate tires).

I also used to carry a full-sized axe since once a tree fell and blocked passage to my ski condo.  

I usually have a crowbar in my car trunk and truck.  

Most importantly, you have an explanation


why do you have these channel locks, pliers, cutters, and big screwdrivers in this dirty ass bag?
i dunno
You a mechanic?
no
Work in the trades?
no
You collect tools?
no
You just break in to that storage place over there?
HELL NAW

Well, wouldn't it be an interesting country, if everyone was allowed to make their own determination as to what the Constitution says, and was allowed to act on that belief.

For instance, if I think that when you send microwaves through my body, with your cell phone, then that gives me the right to monitor those microwaves, and listen to what you say, without a warrant.  But, I bet you don't think that's a correct interpretation, do you?

So, maybe it's a good idea after all, to let neutral parties like judges, make those calls.