Untagged posted:

Are you asking a question or not? You were admittedly intoxicated in public - which in this state is cause for arrest irregardless of further criminality.

Untagged posted:

I don't know where you are, and I can't speak to any of it. What I will say... If you have probable cause for an arrest and take someone in to custody, a search incident to the lawful arrest is itself lawful. Irregardless of the future dropping of charges or not. Here, you can be "arrested" for being drunk/disorderly/etc. taken for processing, and subsequently released to a sober responsible party (a family lawyer perhaps). You might think nothing came of it, but the warrants would just be obtained later. This happens all the time with juveniles.


e/// But since you said "Queen" in your last post, I have to assume your not in the United States. And in that case, I'll wait for a Brit Cop Goon to chime in. I can't help but think they have something similar there though as in the United States whereby out of town cops get sworn in with local authority in case it's necessary during major special events where they are called in for assistance.

Skyworks posted:

Just got hooked up for ye olde 'breach of the peace', spent three hours in custody for walking round in a group drunk on a Monday night. As soon as my lawyer got there and agreed to represent us all they dropped the charges.

Holy poo poo, they detained us under a charge that was used to prevent christians killing muslims back in the day. Breach of the peace, so glad they stopped our private army from killing heathens, that could have been bad...

What the hell is going on with the police guys?

Lord Gaga posted:

Muffler stuff

grover posted:

Sounds like you and your friends were being a bunch of drunken assholes. Be grateful you got off without any charges.

Kaal posted:

Simply being a drunken rear end in a top hat is not a crime.

Skyworks posted:

Just got hooked up for ye olde 'breach of the peace', spent three hours in custody for walking round in a group drunk on a Monday night.

Kaal posted:

Simply being a drunken rear end in a top hat is not a crime. "Breach of the peace" is a completely subjective charge, and if a cop can't even make that stick then he must have really been full of poo poo. But apparently for some reason Joe Public had to pay for a lawyer to gain the protection of the law from false charges. Meanwhile, the cop gets attaboys by his peers for taking the law into his own hands.

Cmdr. Shepard posted:

If you honestly think that this guy was arrested for simply "walking around in a group drunk on a Monday night", then welp.

No, being a drunken rear end in a top hat is not a crime, but all kinds of crimes stem from it. Disorderly conduct, obstructing, etc. Sorry if you don't think those are real crimes, but just because a charge doesn't stick doesn't mean it wasn't a lawful or proper arrest. Lots of my charges don't stick, it doesn't mean I'm going to stop doing my job.

Kaal posted:

This is blue line bullshit. A guy gets charges, which end up being dropped as soon as a lawyer takes a look at them, but every cop in the thread is sticking up for the officer who arrested a bunch of innocents.

Thesoldier posted:

Two questions

1: Orange, Seminole, or Osceola county
2: SO, FHP, PD

If it was a uniform traffic citation (UTC) the statue should be on the lower part of the ticket. It would say SECTION SUBSECTION

316.272 would be the law if it was for an aftermarket muffler that creates excesive noise. Old timers refer to the law for "Racing Mufflers"

The sound level defined in 403.415 are older I believe. Back in the day Florida required yearly inspections, and had an emissions law. They would measure the exhaust polution and sound polution

in 316.272 it's up to the officer to prove that the sound was excessive. Generally you can tell when the exhaust system is not stock, and my own way of proving is if a car passes me above 70 miles an hour, and the exhaust sound vibrates my windshield, it's too loud.

My suggestion since it's a non-moving violation, if he wrote you under the state law and not county ordinance is get it fixed and when you show up for court, tell the officer you got it fixed. If you got it fixed, maybe the officer will dismiss it, or the judge. I've issued citations for improper muffler, illegal window tint, and had people elect court dates just to say "Hey I got it fixed" and I've asked the judge to dismiss it.


edit: Although to be fair they are going to need to rewrite 316.272 since the Nissan leaf has entered the market and has no exhaust.

Whip Slagcheek posted:

And here is why we tend to avoid discussing specific instances where people come in and say "I got arrested, what bullshit!" If we explain the reasoning behind it, its dismissed out of hand as "blue line bullshit." What do you want us to do, pat him on the shoulder and tell he had his rights violated? We don't have the arrest report in front of us, we weren't on the scene, and we're certainly not going to hear the full, unbiased version of the story from the guy that got arrested.

Cmdr. Shepard posted:

Everytime I arrest a drunk for doing something stupid like battery, criminal damage, obstructing, trespassing, it's always the same thing. But nevermind the years of experience I have dealing with drunks, you go on raging against that blue line, Kaal.

Lord Gaga posted:

Hey man thanks for dropping in. How are you liking your current beat? Glad to see you got hired.

A rather notorious PD, not OPD, in OC outside of city limits. I am hoping for 316.272. That law is a lot more fair and reasonable than 316.293(5) which is basically the arbitrary and capriciously enforced law poster child.

Kaal posted:

But this is exactly what I'm talking about. If you don't think that you have enough information to agree with Skyworks (which I completely agree with), then how is there enough information to give the unknown cop a pass? I'm sure I rolled my eyes at Skyworks just as much as anyone else here, but I didn't leap to the conclusion that the cop must have been justified.

Kaal posted:

When was the last time you arrested a drunk for battery and criminal damage but you charged him with breach of the peace instead?

Whip Slagcheek posted:

I'm not giving the Aussie cop a "pass," I'm explaining that there are such rules in place in a lot of places and for the reasons some of my fellow copgoons mentioned. Asking us about your particular arrest scenario will almost always put us in between a rock and a hard place because we can't really side with the poster since we weren't at the scene to see what lead up to their decision to make an arrest. But, when we do our best to stay neutral and explain the logic behind the law as written, its assumed to be a thin blue line-style circling of the wagons.

Whip Slagcheek posted:

I've done this before in situations where I'm forced to make an arrest (example: a drunken fight that I witness), but don't want to ruin the guys life with a violent crime stat against him. Breach of the Peace/Disorderly Conduct is a much lesser charge that can be plead out or dismissed, while a battery charge less so.

Kaal posted:

I get that it's difficult, but what other reaction should one have when a poster comes up with a vague story and every cop in the thread supports the arrest despite it being thrown out of court? I mean what is that other than "I'm sure that the cop had a good reason for arresting you at the time (because he's a cop)".

Whip Slagcheek posted:

Perhaps its best to just not bring these types of stories in because it'll inevitably lead to an "Us vs. Them" argument.

beanieson posted:

Just chiming in to say that legit arrests are nolle prossed by district attorneys all the time.

Cmdr. Shepard posted:

While I agree with certain aspects of the occupy movement, I can't in good conscience support the entirety of the the movement based on the behavior I've seen in NYC and Chicago... Hell, my Sgt (who is as liberal as they come) even calls the occupiers a bunch of instigators.

edit - *ducks*

Also, it's kind of the same thing with the tea party. I agree with some of their positions, but I wouldn't ever call myself a "tea partier".

Kaal posted:

That's a fair answer, but I'm sure that you'll agree that such things are uncommon. Certainly there's no basis for concluding that such was the case in this specific instance. There's no real basis to make any conclusion at all.

Whip Slagcheek posted:

Good lord that 316.293(5) statute looks bad. It pretty much makes any type of amplifying muffler illegal. Damnit, I like hearing my exhaust note when I'm accelerating on the highway.

Interested to see how they measure the dB's objectively to prove that its outside of the legal limit, I've never enforced such a rule.

Some dicks in florida posted:

(c) For all violations of ss. 316.2935 and 316.610. However, for a violation of s. 316.2935 or s. 316.610, if the person committing the violation corrects the defect and obtains proof of such timely repair by an affidavit of compliance executed by the law enforcement agency within 30 days from the date upon which the traffic citation was issued, and pays $4 to the law enforcement agency, thereby completing the affidavit of compliance, then upon presentation of said affidavit by the defendant to the clerk within the 30-day time period set forth under s. 318.14(4), the fine must be reduced to $10, which the clerk of the court shall retain.

grover posted:

Sounds like you and your friends were being a bunch of drunken assholes. Be grateful you got off without any charges.

Cmdr. Shepard posted:

My position has always been that there's no reason to cover up facts, alter a story, or post anything but the facts of the case as you know them to be. We're all just random internet people here, if someone wants an honest opinion from someone in this thread, it's in their best interest to tell the whole story even if you think it makes you look bad.

Whip Slagcheek posted:

Seriously. It seems lately if the case isn't a slam dunk, open and shut case the attorneys immediately jump to nolle proseque. If they're so overworked and understaffed, add more attorneys?

Or, even better, give us the option to issue citations for some of the lesser criminal charges that, as of right now, our only option is an arrest if we want to enforce the law (read: driving on a suspended/revoked license, urinating/defecating in public, etc.).

Diplomaticus posted:

States can barely afford to add more attorneys even at the poo poo pay that ADA/ASA's get already (while graduating with up to a quarter-million dollars in student loan debt). I turned down a position in the SAO's office in Montgomery County back in law school which would have been a guaranteed job (just before the legal market crashed). They had 6 summer positions, couldn't fill but two of them.

Now, that same office regularly gets 30+ applicants for the same number of UNPAID positions.

Lord Gaga posted:

Whip Slagcheek posted:

Wait, so they changed them to unpaid internships? Good lord. I guess this ties into the completely un-related (to the discussion) topic of government spending in a down economy. But, still, my point about the ability to issue citations for more lesser charges would be a welcome addition. Ties up less officers since you're not processing anyone, keeps people out of handcuffs, and lets the attorneys focus on more pressing matters. Win/win/win. Make it happen, Diplomaticus.


Weird. If they're going to have a statute on the books that sets specific parameters to abide by, you'd think they'd establish an objective way to measure non-compliance. For example, tint meters for tint law violations. vv As Thesoldier said, if you can manage it, get the exhaust fixed to be less noisy and then bring it to the charging officer. He'll likely get rid of it or reduce it.

Diplomaticus posted:

They went from "lowly paid" to "Entirely unpaid, and people would probably pay you 5-digits for the position."

-e- a year or two ago there was an ASA position in the middle of Alaska advertised in the lawgoon thread. Several lawgoons that I'm aware of interviewed for the position -- who knows how many non-goons went for it. For a single job that would require moving to Alaska to prosecute drunk Inuits.

Lord Gaga posted:

316.610 ticket

Thesoldier posted:

FYI the 316.610 AKA the unsafe vehicle aka Fix-it Ticket in Florida has different fines per counties. State law says the county needs to charge a minimum of $10

Some counties like Palm Beach charge $93 if you get it fixed instead of the $116 while others just charge the $10

So yeah in some counties, you don't write a fix-it ticket because it's not even worth it because the person still has to pay an assload of cash

Secret Spoon posted:

Me and a few friends got drunk in the brick town area of Oklahoma City, and I mean we where plastered. Like, I think we racked up around 7 or 8 hours of total bar time. We tried calling a cab a few times, but the cab never showed. We start walking as we couldn't get a ride. About a mile from the bar a cop pulls over and asks us whats up. We tell him the story, and he calls two other cars over. I thought we where hosed, but what happened was magical.


I was drunk, on my birthday, in the front seat of a cop car, playing with the sirens all the way to base. BEST DAY EVER.

Cmdr. Shepard posted:

So you got a ride... home? Or to the station?

Cmdr. Shepard posted:

So you got a ride... home? Or to the station?