Should I consent to a search on a traffic stop if I have nothing to hide?

2015-07-08T10:02:56-04:00

Years ago when I was 16 years old (I am 38 now) I closed at a store I was working. I drove an older friend home that lived somewhere that took us on a dirt road. My friend was in his early 20's, he had long hair, tattoos, and he played in a rock band. A sheriff's deputy initiated a traffic stop on my vehicle past midnight. I do not recall making any traffic code infractions and my car was in total compliance of the law. The deputy did not state his probable cause, and I did not know any better to ask. My friend knew, but he didn't want to advise me as it might arise to further interaction with the deputy. The deputy requested to search my car. I felt compelled to answer yes for I feared I would go to jail, or I would be out there longer in the middle of nowhere. The deputy found nothing as there was nothing, and he released us. My friend told me the deputy thought we had drugs as he was guessing due to his long hair and tattoos.

My advice: DO NOT CONSENT TO SEARCH and after you refuse, ask the police officer politely for their probable cause.

Some of you might know already, I am an MP and I have conducted over a thousand traffic stops. I have treated people with the utmost respect, and I acted under the color of the law with every motorist. I want to share my experiences with fellow SMs and veterans.

If you do consent to a search, know your car. First, is it your car? During my experience, people who consented to a search or received a traffic stop from me did not know anything about the vehicle they were operating. Do you remember that camping trip from two weeks ago? Did you leave the knives for cutting fish under the seat? Remember, if you are operating, you are responsible for the registration, the insurance and any item in that vehicle.

As some of you already know, just because someone is a police officer, it does not mean they are a good person. Police have been known to plant evidence. Counties get money from court fees and fines so remember that. Consider recording your interactions with the police because they will record their interaction with you. There are other ways for a police officer to search you care without consent so if you want to know, just ask.

Do you have any experiences to share or questions to ask?

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 8 at 2015 10:06 AM

2015-07-08T10:06:27-04:00

With the caveat that I cannot drive because of Epileptic Seizures...

Response by Cpl Jeff N. made Jul 8 at 2015 10:16 AM

2015-07-08T10:16:20-04:00

Never consent to anything...It is similar to volunteering in the military, don't do it.

Once you consent, anything they find can be a cause for arrest/fine. Even if you didn't know it was in the car. My response would be, "no thanks, I will not consent". When they use the old "why do you have something to hide". I would say, "I have nothing to gain in you searching my vehicle".

Response by MSgt Jeff S. made Jul 8 at 2015 10:21 AM

2015-07-08T10:21:57-04:00

SSG (ret) William Martin I struggle with this. While I have nothing to hide, I believe that allowing a search is intrusive and opens up a potential "worst-case scenario" where the LEO plants something. Paranoid, perhaps. But I would prefer to be in as much control as possible, and consenting to a search puts me completely at the mercy of the LEO.
I would like to think that keeping my cool and being respectful would carry the day, but we have all had instances where you run into "that guy" that just seems to be having a bad day or an ax to grind. For me, I would prefer to exercise whatever rights I have.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 8 at 2015 10:26 AM

2015-07-08T10:26:15-04:00

Good topic. As K9, I can "find" a reason to search you're car if I really want to. Most people would never know the difference. We do teach against such practices an I personally would never do such a thing. I have hiwever, seen footage of a civilian police K9 indicate on a car which I personally found to be illegitimate. As originally stated, just because we all wear the same uniform doesn't mean we're all the same. Nothing wrong with envoking you're rights.

Response by SGT Bryon Sergent made Jul 8 at 2015 10:40 AM

2015-07-08T10:40:02-04:00

Have always been a law abiding citizen that doesn't drink and drive or do drugs. So therefore have no reason not to. Hell he wants to dig through the crap in my floor go right a head. Just make sure that it comes off after touching it. Might find a week old burger in a bag or something the kids have left under the seat. Just sayin!

Response by COL Jean (John) F. B. made Jul 8 at 2015 10:44 AM

2015-07-08T10:44:55-04:00

I think this is double-edged sword.

First, I totally agree with SSG William H's recommendation that you know your car and what is in it. I have also seen situations where things were found in a vehicle that I am sure the driver had no clue was there. I used to have my car searched by K-9s periodically, just to ensure nobody planted anything in my vehicle without my knowledge.

Having said that, most police officers are honorable and simply intent on performing their duty. As such, I would have no qualms whatsoever in consenting to a search of my vehicle (assuming I had heeded the advice to know what is in my car). Not to do so will immediately subject you to suspicion and result in a much more thorough search, instead of a cursory one. While you may think it smart to ask for the probable cause, a smart police officer can always come up with one that will hold up in court. Bottom line is that, if he wants to search your vehicle, he will.

I find that it is always best to comply with police instructions and requests. If you think they were wrong, comply and complain later.

Response by SPC Jan Allbright, M.Sc., R.S. made Jul 8 at 2015 11:15 AM

2015-07-08T11:15:50-04:00

My LEO buddies have a word for people that waive their rights, "chump"
Of course these guys also said something like "If you see someone with Vietnam Vet stickers, toss them because THEY always have something."

Response by SSgt Charles Edwards made Jul 8 at 2015 11:43 AM

2015-07-08T11:43:09-04:00

I look at this way, unless a probable cause is given, refuse the search. If it means getting cuffed, so be it. Any lawyer worth their salt will have the issue squashed in under 24 hours.

However, people fail to understand that when driving on a military installation they ARE consenting to any search while on the base. I've only done this once with a possible active shooter, but normally any inspection was made prior to entry.

People roll their eyes on these things and feel like they're time is being wasted, but one such inspection led to the discovery of a female in the trunk of a car. The guys driving the vehicle had contractor badges, but no escort authority. Why they were smuggling this woman onto the base is unknown to me, but it validated the reasons why we do (or in my case did) these checks.

Response by SGT William Howell made Jul 8 at 2015 11:51 AM

2015-07-08T11:51:53-04:00

While I agree with you as far as not consenting to a search, I think you are a little off on your search and seizure. Lawyers have classes that they attend for an entire semester just on this and you really have to be up on this.

Was was an MP in the Guard, Active Duty and a full time police officer. I am a fully qualified interdiction officer and have seized almost a million dollars in illegal drugs and money.

So you actually have a seizure and a search lumped into one traffic stop.

A traffic stop is a seizure. You are not allowed to leave therefore your person has been seized. The courts have ruled that with traffic stop you do not need probable cause, just reasonable suspicion. Probable cause means more probable than not that a crime has been committed. Reasonable suspicion means that you can articulate that you think a crime may have occurred. There is a big difference in a court of law. So crossing the yellow line can be all you need to effect a traffic stop. You still have to have probable cause to write a ticket or make an arrest. Because you are not allowed to leave now Miranda comes into effect and you do not have to answer any questions the police officer may ask you, as he may use any statements you give as evidence of a crime. You do still have to provide licenses, registration, and proof of insurance. You must also exit the vehicle if the police officer ask you to. These are are things that are based off case law and are accepted in any court as the lawful request.

The search is where it gets tricky. So you are on a traffic stop, your person is still seized or in layman's terms, you can't leave. A police officer CAN'T and shouldn't ask you to search your car while you are still not free to leave. That is coercion or, in English, that the seized party feels like they must submit to the search because the police officer is holding them at the traffic stop. He must make it clear that you are free to leave. I always wrote a ticket or a warning then hand it to them and say, "You are free to leave." Now that they understand they are free to leave I would ask for consent to search the car. You now have the right to say, "No" or "Yes".

If you say no, then the officer has the right, by law, to seize your person again and call a dog out. Again, the police officer must have reasonable suspicion to seize you again and that a crime may have occurred and be able to articulate that in court. If a dog does come he can only sniff around the car, not in the car, but if he hits on the car that is probable cause and now they can search all they want.

If you say yes, then you can set the ground rules as to where he can search. You can say that he can't search the trunk and he must abide by those guidelines.

If you are pulled over and are asked to consent to search the first question I would ask is, "Am I free to leave?" If he says "yes". then tell him you don't consent and to have a nice day and drive off. If he says "no", then you still tell him you don't consent and let him do what ever he is gong to do. Any lawyer with a night school degree should be able to suppress anything found in the car. I can't emphasize this enough. Just because you believe the search is illegal you don't have the right to interfere with the police officer. Take it to court and if it is suppressed then you can seek a civil judgment in a lawsuit.

I could go on for days about searching movable property vs. residence, who can consent, plain sight, search incident to arrest, and so on. If you have any questions please feel free to ask.

Response by SrA Edward Vong made Jul 8 at 2015 11:54 AM

2015-07-08T11:54:21-04:00

I would ask for a probably cause and reason, if the reason is not valid, I would deny them their search.

Response by SGT Jeremiah B. made Jul 8 at 2015 11:55 AM

2015-07-08T11:55:28-04:00

Unless I have a reason to think the officer has a valid concern, no. Even then, they like to separate you from the search and that isn't happening.

Response by LCpl Mark Lefler made Jul 8 at 2015 1:44 PM

2015-07-08T13:44:59-04:00

you really only have to consent to one if the officer has probable cause or a warrant.

Response by PO1 John Miller made Jul 8 at 2015 2:02 PM

2015-07-08T14:02:05-04:00

This is America and we still have Constitutional rights. I will never consent to a search of my vehicle or other property under my control. It doesn't matter if I "have nothing to hide."

I for one do believe that given all the recent bad publicity cops across the country have received that cops should be held to a higher standard. However I also believe that they serve a necessary function.

With that said, I have only ever been pulled over for blatant violations (mostly speeding and a couple of burnt out taillights).
I do remember one time as a teenager there was an empty beer bottle in the back of my car, in plain view. My younger brother had found it earlier and picked it up so that he could turn it in for the 10 cent refund. I totally forgot the bottle was there and the cop not only saw it but said he could smell it (I have a horrible sense of smell so I'm not calling him a liar). He did keep on asking me if I had anymore alcohol in the car but never once asked to search my car. I was adamant that I had no other alcoholic containers in my vehicle and he eventually let me go. He didn't even cite me for having an open container.

Response by SGT Kevin Gardner made Jul 8 at 2015 2:41 PM

2015-07-08T14:41:39-04:00

No you should never wave your rights, that's why you have them.the idea that your rights don't matter if you have nothing to hide is absurd Ihave never liked that argument.

Response by SPC George Adkins made Jul 8 at 2015 3:38 PM

2015-07-08T15:38:41-04:00

"If you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear."
This quote was used by Orwell in his book, '1984', and by Goebbells in Nazi propaganda. With those kinds of endorsements, who can argue? \\end sarcasm\\ Consent to nothing. if they have probable cause, they won't need your consent. Nothing good can come from a stranger, armed, and with wide authority going through your things unabated.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 8 at 2015 4:19 PM

2015-07-08T16:19:58-04:00

As a licensed attorney, I would tell you NEVER consent to a search, NEVER give a statement, and NEVER waive your right to counsel. It doesn't matter if you have something to hide or not. There are numerous examples of people being implicated by things left behind by passengers or previous owners. And, law enforcement is NEVER your friend. So, you gain NOTHING by trying to cooperate to "clear" things up. I wouldn't ask the officer about probable cause or get into any sort of legal argument with them. Just politely tell them that you have friends who are attorneys and they've always told you that AS A GENERAL RULE you should never consent, but you're aware that they may not need your consent and you will respectfully comply with any orders/instructions they give. You might be surprised how often a simple statement like that results in an officer shrugging and saying, "Fair enough. Have a good day."

Response by SSG Ralph Innes made Jul 9 at 2015 5:24 PM

2015-07-09T17:24:33-04:00

I represent a lot of clients in criminal defense cases. I have a few basic rules I tell my clients:
1. Never consent to any search.
2. Always ask the law enforcment officer if you are free to leave
3. If you are free to leave, then leave.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 11 at 2015 4:31 PM

2015-07-11T16:31:54-04:00

Here's my take on it: Even if I have nothing to hide, the LEO is still wasting my time. The worst thing I have on my record is a speeding ticket and I've never used a drug in my life. So him searching my vehicle would in fact be a waste of both of our time. Second, imagine if other government offices were to take an expediency over legality approach to the Constitution. That's not a precedent I want to support.

Response by CPT Alan W. made Aug 7 at 2015 2:54 AM

2015-08-07T02:54:51-04:00

When I was a Deputy Sheriff, I was always amazed that folks voluntarily let me search their vehicle after I told them they were free to go. Then, I was even more amazed that they were astonished when I found a roach in the ashtray or a rock on the floor or something else.

Once you have our DL back, you're told that you're free to go, leave! Roll up all your windows and leave. If the Officer says "excuse me, but do have one other question" before you get your windows rolled up, tell them "sorry, I have to go", and then roll up your windows and leave.

Note that it's different on a government compound, such as a military facility. Someone else will need to clarify how the search rules are different on a place such as an Army Post or Navy Base.

Response by SPC George Rudenko made Aug 7 at 2015 3:58 AM

2015-08-07T03:58:07-04:00

So, when the two inmates escaped in New York, you would refuse to allow an LEO to check your trunk?

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 7 at 2015 4:16 AM

2015-08-07T04:16:49-04:00

Yeah...not a good idea.... Honestly if If I have nothing to hide id let him search, and even then Id still run the risk of getting shot.

Response by SPC Dakota Stafford made Sep 20 at 2016 4:49 AM

2016-09-20T04:49:00-04:00

Being out of service I am now a police officer, my answer for that question, does the officer have probable cause, in the end it's really all up to you, if your an upstanding citizen, you cooperating with the officer he has no reason to be searching you, no you have rights, however it is your responsibility to know your rights, can that officer violate your rights if you don't know he's violating them at all? Generally when asked to search a vehicle it is twisted into a question form just quick enough to make you think the officer has the right to do so anyways, if you really have anything to hide and I want to find it, I can always extend the time it takes to issue you a citation, and call for a K9 to do an open air sniff around the vehicle, if it hits on the vehicle you just gave me consent regardless.

I say no, but be polite in telling the officer, because most often when asked, he hasn't finished writing your ticket, and attitude has a lot to do with weather or not you get a ticket.

Response by SFC J Fullerton made Sep 20 at 2016 5:07 PM

2016-09-20T17:07:41-04:00

No, you don't have to. If you portray the image of law abiding citizen and there is no glaring PC or reasonable suspicion, the cop is just going to warn you or write a citation and let you go. He is not going to want to waste time wanting to search you. However, the time of night, your age and appearance, the car you are driving, and passengers in your car can create enough reasonable suspicion for the officer to ask probing questions to get probable cause. Some are bored and start "fishing" if they think you may be up to something. Keep in mind that there some (not all) police officers that are just bullies and the second you challenge them something triggers in their heads and they will go out of their way using every legal loop hole at their disposal to make the next hour (or more) miserable for you just because they can. You are not legally obligated to answer any probing questions not pertaining to the reason for the stop, like where are you going and where you are coming from. But if you don't answer, you are challenging their authority and being uncooperative and they can't stand that. Using lawyer lingo and constitutional rights just pisses them off even more and they will show you how they can legally circumvent all that and there is nothing you can do about it. "Reasonable suspicion" is subjective, and they probably have a playbook of reasons to use and when to use them. Again, not painting with a broad brush here. Most LEO's are well composed and professional. But it happens. So, if you get in this situation, you have two choices, comply and submit, or refuse and risk getting f#cked with on the side of the road for the next hour.

Response by PFC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 27 at 2016 11:52 AM

2016-10-27T11:52:47-04:00

What harm can come from it? Officers are just doing their job

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 2 at 2016 11:29 PM

2016-11-02T23:29:40-04:00

Easy answer is ....No Warrant No Entry :) As a fellow MP no one is getting in my car. (Unless its at the gate) Having Taught and Written the Traffic and Felony traffic stop classes there is less than zero percent your getting in my car legally. I have arguments with my wife over this. She cot pulled over by the locals and felt she had nothing to hide but she called me. I told her to hand the officer the phone. I asked them their badge number and what their reasonable articulatable suspicion was to search my wife's car. They told her to drive safely and have a nice day :)

Response by SFC Gregory S Heiny made Nov 23 at 2016 5:05 AM

2016-11-23T05:05:40-05:00

NEVER CONSENT TO VOLUNTARY SEARCH EVER!!!!! IF THEY GIVE YOU A SEARCH WARRANT DOCUMENT MAKE SURE YOU READ AND UNDERSTAND ALL OF IT PLUS CALL YOUR ATTORNEY. EVERYONE SHOULD KNOW THE NAMES AND TELEPHONE NUMBERS OF COMPETENT ATTORNEYS IN THE VARIOUS FIELDS IN LAW. MAKE SURE YOU CONDUCT YOUR OWN INVESTIGATION/DUE DILIGENCE INTO THE VARIOUS ATTORNEYS AND UPDATE YOUR SMALL LIST ONCE A YEAR MINIMUM.

Response by SPC John Abbott made Dec 24 at 2016 8:38 PM

2016-12-24T20:38:35-05:00

Never consent to ansesrch

Response by SFC Ralph E Kelley made Aug 25 at 2018 6:52 AM

2018-08-25T06:52:21-04:00

"Just say NO" - Is your right.
I conceal-carry and always inform the officer - not that I get pulled over much - it's just common sense.
However I sometimes carry an AR-15, M1A or other rifle and ready ammo in the trunk.
I like to shoot after work as have several friends who are happy to let me drop by as long as I let them bang away too.

Response by SSG Robert Ricci made Nov 27 at 2019 9:05 AM

2019-11-27T09:05:42-05:00

I realize that this is an older thread but I'm going to tell you some things that you're not going to like to hear and others are not going to like to read. I was a military policeman in the 1980s and 90s before a civilian career. This was long before the new mentality that individuals can openly express their perceived rights and completely disrespect police officers. I was a 95B and you're obviously a 31B and very likely have the mindset of a millennial. Why you became a military policeman eludes me. Pulling people over only to tell them not to consent to a consensual search is a dereliction of your duty. Take the badge off because you don't deserve to wear it. Why would you sign up to be a military cop only to legally advise others as you have indicated?

Your job as a military policeman is to protect and defend. That means if you make a traffic stop on an individual and he's intoxicated you're going to apprehend him for DUI. You're not going to call him a ride from his unit. Your job is to apprehend him. What is company Commander chooses to do later is up to him. You have potentially saved the lives of others. I too was at Ft. Hood and worked traffic. 401st MP Co. attached to the 256th. Hood was like fishing in a barrel. Ft. Hood CURRENTLY has a crime rate 65 times higher than the national average. 65 TIMES!!! So you're going to be a MP there and road side advise subjects no to give consent go work for JAG. Your job is to deter and detect crime using all legal tools available to you.

When I was there at Hood I was working the east gate. It was grave yard shift. Drivers were to dim their lights as they approached. One cat dimmed like 1/2 mile away. I stopped him as he entered (I didn't wave him through to be more accurate) and initiated a conversation. I detected an odor of an alcoholic beverage coming from him and and turned him into the turn out. He was acting deceptive. I asked for and received a consent search. When I searched the trunk I located multiple 1 gallon mason jars of water germinating marijuana seeds. I also located boxes of surgical instruments. Bingo. I hooked him for DUI, possession and cultivation and possession of stolen military property - mostly forceps commonly used to smoke a joint. I did my job!

In other cases if you pull someone over and they are exhibiting deceptive behavior and you believe they may be transporting narcotics your job is to protect and to defend other service members and family members against this. For their own good! If that means you ask for a consent search then you ask for a consent search consistent with the Fourth Amendment! You don't tell them "I'm asking for consent but I advise you to say no." You have a form where you have advised them that they have the right to refuse and then have them sign. You then do the search. Anything you find that is a violation of law is admissible under the Fourth Amendment because you obtain their consent. If you truly knew what you were doing as a 31B you would know that a consent search is not a probable cause search. The mixing of the two makes me question your MOS but I see crossed pistols on your lapels and the 720th MP Bn. insignia's in your epaulets. What unit of III Corps. were you in? I KNOW the 89th. It isn't even a probable cause search but a reasonable suspicion but in your example a consent search. You should know that. Military policemen are taught to the same standards as most city police department's these days. We were even in the 1970s when I went through basic and AIT. The fourth amendment has not changed since then.

Most soldiers despise the military police for these very reasons. The military policeman can take their freedom from them. Your words speak more of the millennial attitude that what you do is your own business. That means if you want to have some marijuana that's your choice even though it's against military law.

I'm going to be very blunt. If you truly are a military policeman take the badge off and change your MOS. You have the wrong classification. Just like a city police officer your job is to seek out crime for the benefit of others. Not to advise individuals that you think may be deceptive and concealing narcotics in this example to refuse a consent search. I'll tell you what would happen if I were still in MP. I'd call a dog out and do a walk around as long as it did not take longer than a traffic stop should. If I made an apprehension now it is a search incidental ton a lawful arrest.

Your words are simply incredulous. The comments of others here are equally incredulous and represent the current mentality. As service members we're supposed to be better than. I realize some of you are going to be tempted to vote me down for giving my opinion as a military policeman and now is a retired civilian police officer but so be it. If you are doing drugs as a soldier you are putting the lives of your fellow soldiers in danger. You're hooked on meth? What's going to happen if you're on the front line and your job is to repel the enemy? Or your job is to go door-to-door looking for bad guys? In that moment you're doing just what MP's do. What if a soldier gets your son hooked on meth or heroin? Still hate me for doing my job?

Assist. Protect. Defend. Do your job but do it with honor and integrity. That means if you need to use the tools that you have been taught that are legal then you use them without advising subjects to decline a consent search. Let that be their own plan.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 28 at 2019 8:52 AM

2019-11-28T08:52:45-05:00

If I learned anything as an MP it's that you have nothing to gain and everything to lose by making statements and consenting to searches.

Response by SSG Darrell Bullock made Jun 14 at 2021 12:14 AM

2021-06-14T00:14:47-04:00

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made Jun 14 at 2021 12:24 AM

2021-06-14T00:24:57-04:00

In the US, you do NOT resist the cops. You do that, they murder you, and then your social media gets scoured for anything that can paint you in a bad light...
Don't think for an instant your rights matter when you get their trigger fingers itching.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Jun 14 at 2021 12:35 PM

2021-06-14T12:35:44-04:00

I am going on a tangent. I never get speeding tickets cause I usually don't drive much past the speed limit, and when I am stopped and asked if I knew I was speeding, I always said yes. lol They would give me a warning. Maybe they thought my honesty was refreshing. lol

Response by CPT Lawrence Cable made Jun 14 at 2021 1:12 PM

2021-06-14T13:12:50-04:00

No. If the officer had probable cause, he wouldn't have asked permission. The next step is to threaten to call the dogs. At that point, you follow instructions and fight it in Court.

Response by SPC Frank Beachel made Aug 17 at 2022 10:39 AM

2022-08-17T10:39:53-04:00

Technically, you have to allow the search. Driving is a privilege, not a right. If you have nothing to hide, and the officer is being polite and respectful, then just agree. If they are being assholes and disrespectful, then tell them "No". BUT DO IT RESPECTFULLY, DON'T ANY IN WAY START BEING DISRESPECTFUL BACK. YOU WILL LOSE THAT CONTEST!!!!!!!!! Make your complaint at a later time, NOT ON THE STREET. No civilian ever wins that contest. I speak from experience, not only did I serve 6 years in green in the USAR as a 95C- 95B and 23 years in the Thin Blue Line.

Response by SSG Jack Scott made Aug 17 at 2022 12:57 PM

2022-08-17T12:57:10-04:00

As a retired police office I can tell you NO!!!! Some young officer may threaten to call for a K9 just tell them… “Go ahead I have time do you”. There is an actually time Time limit to conduct a traffic stop with most being around 10 - 15 minutes and that’s too much time. I got my time down to about 7mins and that’s with writing a citation. If an Officer hold you on a traffic stop for an extended time fishing without out a citation immediately file a complaint. You can also file A complaint with the Townhall or county commissioners office. LEO hates when you go over their head to their real boss the Mayors office or County Seat. Know your rights