Legal Issues

Criminal law and procedure is filled with many little ins and outs that determine how laws are executed.  One must pay careful attention to these intricacies or find later that erroneous mistakes have been made.  This cannot be truer than for that of members of law enforcement.  Officers are responsible for making judgments calls daily based on suspicions and facts in plain view.  These situations are termed as reasonable suspicions and probable cause.  They are very similar but very different when it comes to applying the law.  Understanding how each of these particulars works can be the deciding factor of evidence being admitted into court or an entire case being thrown out.
   
In a given scenario, two officers were patrolling an area known for its drug problems.  The officers on duty noticed a vehicle make an illegal turn, and they pulled it over.  There were three individuals inside the car, and the driver was observed by both officers bending down over his seat.  With the officers positioned on either side of the vehicle, they asked the driver about his suspicious action, but the driver denied having done it.  The officers asked the driver again and the driver suddenly had a case of amnesia and did not remember having done it.  The officers took all three people out of the car and searched the vehicle.  Upon doing so they found fifty grams of crack cocaine and ten thousand dollars in cash.  The crack cocaine was under the driver seat, and the cash was under the passenger seat.  The officers charged all three suspects with possession of crack cocaine.
   
The first two items to be considered in the aforementioned scenario are reasonable suspicion and probable cause.  Reasonable suspicion can determined by assessing as to whether or not a reasonable person would perceive that a crime was in progress, had been committed, or was about to take place (Nicholson, 2010).  In laymans terms, reasonable suspicion means that there is not enough evidence to perform a search of the person or property.  Probable cause is different in that there is enough evidence justifying a search of a person or property.  The United States Supreme Court defined probable cause as, the known facts and circumstances are sufficient to warrant a man of reasonable prudence in the belief that contraband or evidence of a crime will be found.

It is obvious that the officers were able to establish reasonable suspicion by the evasiveness of the drivers answers when asked two simple questions.  The level of reasonable suspicion was upgraded to probable cause when the officers realized that there could be a weapon or drugs under the drivers seat.  An officer is performing his legitimate function of duties in conducting a search of a person and property if he fears for his life.  This could have been the case in this scenario.
   
There are five steps that must be followed in establishing probable cause during a traffic stop.  The first step is pulling a vehicle over.  An officer cannot just stop a vehicle for no apparent reason.  There must have been a moving violation committed in order to establish a legitimate reason to stop the car.  Second, the officer must question the suspect.  If the subject seems unclear, confused, nervous, unable to make eye contact, or seems hostile, then the officer can declare probable cause and proceed with searching the individual and the car.  If the officer is still unsure, then he must move on to step three which is asking for consent to search.  An officer must ask for permission to search a car.  The suspect is well within their legal rights to refuse a search but once a suspect consents, he or she waives their Fourth Amendment rights (Nicholson, 2010).  Step four relates to a suspect refusing to give permission to search.  An officer has the right to temporarily detain a suspect in order to get a drug dog on the scene.  The United States Supreme Court determined that it is not unconstitutional for a drug dog to sniff the outer perimeter of a vehicle, nor does it require a search warrant.  If a drug dog sniffs out possible drugs, then probable cause is instituted and the search can be performed.  The fifth and final step in establishing probable cause is a full search with probable cause.  If a search is performed without probable cause being legitimately found, then any and all evidence seized will not be admissible in a court of law.
   
There are four questionable and problematic concerns with the way in which the officers handled the situation.  First, the officers never asked for consent to search the vehicle.  There was no mention of drug smelling aromas coming from the vehicle either.  Although the officers could argue in court that they suspected a weapon and feared for their life, it was still, nonetheless, a careless error on their part.  An officer must always ask for permission to search a vehicle when attempting to make a probable cause determination.  Secondly, the officers could have temporarily detained the suspects and asked headquarters to dispatch a canine unit to the scene.  Clearly, the canine unit would have been able to sniff out the crack cocaine from the outer perimeters of the vehicle without hesitation.

Third, the officers should have only charged the driver with possession of the crack cocaine since it was under his seat.  The passengers will be able to argue the fact in court that they had no knowledge of the drugs being under the seat.  Finally, all three of the suspects should have been charged with trafficking due to the large sum of money under the passenger seat of the car.  The large sum of money is a good indicator that someone in the vehicle is selling drugs.

Officers must use an extreme level of problem solving, quick thinking, and tact when performing traffic stops.  They must have a true understanding and grasp of the law as they are the beginning phase of many criminal court matters.  There is absolutely no room for error.  Reasonable suspicion is the first instinct in a possible crime scene and probable cause is the next step up.  Specific steps must be followed in order to establish the existence of probable cause in order to secure a good case in court.  The court system relies heavily on the professional conduct of members of law enforcement.  It also relies on the law being followed to the letter.  If an officer is going to do a job, then the job should be done right the first time around because the court does not allow do overs.