Abraham wrote:I have mixed thoughts regarding some of what's posted here.
It's generally advised one should always firmly state when traffic stopped by an LEO: "I do not consent to a search"
O.K. and how often does that stance require the expense of a lawyer later?
Rarely/Sometimes/Often? And I'm not arguing one should consent either...just asking.
Assuming one takes a principled stand, denying consent of his vehicle and it happens anyway. What's the next step, assuming nothing incriminating is found and the officer goes ahead with a search?
You go on about your business and forget it happened?
Also, can you remain silent legally without being Mirandized? (with the exception of stating you have nothing more to say than you want a lawyer before uttering anything further?)
I'm going to put myself in the LEO's shoes for a moment: I make a traffic stop and the driver invokes now consent for search and silence without a lawyer. As an LEO, I'm definitely going to pursue looking as deeply into this person as legality allows.
Am I saying give in to some LEO on a fishing expedition?
No, but giving the LEO the silent treatment and denying a search seems at first blush in making the stopped person look more than a little quirky...
Well, I wouldn't start the conversation with the LEO by denying a search. That wouldn't come up unless he asks to search.