Being pulled over by LEO
Never have been, and don't plan to be. Very curious as to the actual procedure if it happened. Now I'm sure the officer would come to the side door ( by passenger up front on our DP). So should I ...
Forum Discussion
I posted it before, but here it is again. This is current case law as it pertains to a motor home ON THE ROAD:
A police officer may lawfully stop a vehicle, motorized or otherwise, if he has a reasonable, articulable suspicion that the operator has engaged in criminal activity, including a minor traffic violation.” State v. Roberts, 2d Dist. Montgomery No. 23219, 2010-Ohio-300. The United States Supreme Court has held that routine traffic stops are more “analogous to a so-called Terry stop, ‘than to a formal arrest’” and that police conducting a traffic stop, similar to police conducting a Terry stop, “may ask the detainee a moderate number of questions to determine his identity and to try to obtain information confirming or dispelling the officer’s suspicions.” Berkemer v. McCarty, 468 U.S. 420, 439-440 (1984).
Once the vehicle is stopped, and if the officer has a reasonable suspicion that the occupants are dangerous and may gain immediate control over weapons inside the vehicle, the officer is permitted to order the occupants out of the vehicle and to make a protective search of the vehicle for weapons, based upon considerations of officer safety. See, e.g., State v. Bobo (1988), 37 Ohio St.3d 177, paragraph two of the syllabus; State v. Henderson (Nov. 7, 1997), Montgomery App. No. 16016; Michigan v. Long (1983), 463 U.S. 1032, 1048-1049, 103 S.Ct. 3469; Pennsylvania v. Mimms (1977), 434 U.S. 106, 98 S.Ct. 330.
As you can see, for officer safety, in HIS opinion, no warrant is required.
The officers that I know will not stop a motor home unless they have a good reason. They hate walking up to a MH that can hide all kinds of things that can hurt them.
A police officer may lawfully stop a vehicle, motorized or otherwise, if he has a reasonable, articulable suspicion that the operator has engaged in criminal activity, including a minor traffic violation.” State v. Roberts, 2d Dist. Montgomery No. 23219, 2010-Ohio-300. The United States Supreme Court has held that routine traffic stops are more “analogous to a so-called Terry stop, ‘than to a formal arrest’” and that police conducting a traffic stop, similar to police conducting a Terry stop, “may ask the detainee a moderate number of questions to determine his identity and to try to obtain information confirming or dispelling the officer’s suspicions.” Berkemer v. McCarty, 468 U.S. 420, 439-440 (1984).
Once the vehicle is stopped, and if the officer has a reasonable suspicion that the occupants are dangerous and may gain immediate control over weapons inside the vehicle, the officer is permitted to order the occupants out of the vehicle and to make a protective search of the vehicle for weapons, based upon considerations of officer safety. See, e.g., State v. Bobo (1988), 37 Ohio St.3d 177, paragraph two of the syllabus; State v. Henderson (Nov. 7, 1997), Montgomery App. No. 16016; Michigan v. Long (1983), 463 U.S. 1032, 1048-1049, 103 S.Ct. 3469; Pennsylvania v. Mimms (1977), 434 U.S. 106, 98 S.Ct. 330.
As you can see, for officer safety, in HIS opinion, no warrant is required.
The officers that I know will not stop a motor home unless they have a good reason. They hate walking up to a MH that can hide all kinds of things that can hurt them.
