Just to stir the crap.....What penal or vehicle code in your neck of the woods states that a LEO cannot touch a vehicle he has pulled over?

I would ask the same question to you except that just the vehicle code would apply. Where does it say a LEO can't stop someone for what he believes is a equipment violation(wait...in California it doesn't) TN maybe? Just stirring the crap, it's winter, sorta.

 

I am not sure what the law is in FL. but i received a ticket for a tinted windshield on my Street Glide in good o'l CA, it came factory equipt with the standard 3-4 inch tinted wind deflector. What i did was go directly to my local highway patrol office and kindly asked him to sign off the violation, he looked at my bike laughed and signed the ticket a cleared. i went to court and all the judge wanted to see was that the violation was sighned off as corrected, they charged me $25 bucks for court costs and sent me on my merry way. never had an issue again, just one cop being an A-hole.

 

I can't quote a code. Don't even know it to be true, but I've heard this from official sources: A car is an extension of oneself. In other words, if you are in your car and someone punches your car, they are actually punching you, and it is assault. Maybe rules about a car are different than a bike since you are surrounded by your car? Maybe this isn't really a rule at all? It seems logical to me though that the officer shouldn't have touched his bike.

 

That I know of and this Cali only there is nothing illegal about an officer touching the vehicle. If there was there would be a butt load of LEO's in jail.


An assault is an unlawful attempt, coupled with a present
ability, to commit a violent injury on the person of another.
Just fyi.

It would seem to me that punching your car would be an extreme stretch of that definition. Vandalism maybe. The car on the other hand could be used by a person as a weapon and fall under Assault with a deadly weapon.

Like I said I was just stirring the crap. I already knew the answers as they relate to Cali. It is legal in furtherance of an investigation to physically touch it. You would have a hard time testifying by saying "Well, it looked like it was in violation. I never physically inspected or touched it to verify it." Some things just have to be done.

 

BS. Don't believe everything you hear or what your read on the internet. Total crap. Not even the USSC has come down with anything close to this line of yarn. It's amazing the amount of crap people spread as if true just because they heard it from some other knucklehead who doesn't have a clue and couldn't find it in a statute or court ruling even if you gave them the cite.
Read about the Carroll Doctrine which is one of the major rulings by the USSC concerning vehicles.

 

Oh well, my comments weren't intended for the OP anyway. Going back to sleep.

 

Even in California any detention requires Probable Cause, If done legally. Just to stop to check "If" there is a violation without a warrant or Probable Cause is against the California Penal Code. To stop "just to check" without at least one has been judged by the US Supreme Court to be a violation of Fourth Amendment (Protection from unreasonable search and seizure).
I know from my time with SBSO.

 

I hope took a copy of this thread to court as a back up..

I see over 100 Lawyers responded to it

 

 

Actually Harley has changed the design of the plate. They now have a return spring, so they can not be folded....when you push it back it immediately springs back out! The first ones didn't have that....now they do. So, its obvious why the spring was added.

~Joe