![]() ![]() One court succinctly noted: “In the final calculus, we think it best left to the discretion of the officers in the field who confront myriad circumstances we can only begin to imagine from the relative safety of our chambers. Relying on the Court’s rationale, virtually all federal appellate courts agree that officers may order the passengers to remain inside the automobile or order the passenger to get back into an automobile that he or she voluntarily exited. Wilson, the Supreme Court considered whether police officers can order a passenger out of a lawfully stopped vehicle under the Fourth Amendment, balancing the passenger’s liberty interest with the public interest in officer safety. Q: May an officer require the driver and passengers to remain in the car, solely for safety reasons and without any individual reasonable suspicion of criminal activity?Ī: Yes. ![]() 1990), upholding exit order on the basis that police had reasonable suspicion that person stopped was armed and dangerous) and State v. However, a handful of states have rejected the Mimms/Wilson rule on state constitutional grounds. Supreme Court has repeatedly and unequivocally held that officers may order the driver and any passengers to get out of the car until the traffic stop is over ( Maryland v. Q: May an officer require the driver and passengers to get out of the car, solely for safety reasons and without any individual reasonable suspicion of criminal activity?Ī: Yes. 2016)) raises some of the most common questions raised about traffic stops and passengers.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |