#32 Zach Miller (Automobile Exception) Part 1

Dennis speaks with Zach Miller who is an instructor from Street Cop Training. During this podcast they discuss the legalities of the vehicle exception and the various case law that deals with automobiles.
Zach Miller is a highly-respected police legal instructor and a police officer since 2004, Zach Miller specializes in federal and state constitutional law. Since 2009, Zach has worked very closely with nationally-recognized police law attorney Randy Means. Together, they have contracted with agencies nationwide on a vast array of projects requiring legal expertise and specialization. For example, they worked with several law enforcement agencies, including two of the largest sheriff’s departments in the country, that were subject to federal intervention due to their unconstitutional practices. There, they developed training programs and policies to address the federal government’s justifiable concerns. Other projects have included use of force incident review, high-liability policy development and leadership training.
*
*
*
*
How to join the Street Cop Community
Facebook: / streetcoptra...​
Facebook Group: / stree...​
Instagram: / streetcoptr...​
LEO only Instagram: / ​
LinkedIn: / stre...​

[@ericwright5455]

I like these videos. It gives a glimpse of the psychology of police. I encourage you to put a disclaimer to let all the law enforcement stating that police shouldn't have an opinion on the decisions that courts make because their job is to enforce laws and not feelings or egos

[@5389337]

I enjoy your videos, but sincerely hope that it’s not the prevailing thought amongst the greater law enforcement community that citizens who are worried about privacy = criminals. Law abiding tax payer here…that very much enjoys my privacy and would never consent to any stranger searching through my belongings. Question for the panel…you all spoke several times about rules engaging a search without probable cause…WHY are you looking to search without probable cause? Very much seems contrary to spirit of LEOs respecting/defending citizens constitutional rights? No?

[@bh8459]

Crickets

[@obeewankanobee4351]

Thank you! Can’t wait for the search incident to arrest podcast! May you also consider covering a hot pursuit vs a fresh pursuit when it comes to chasing a suspect who flees inside a home as well! -Texas

[@streetcoptraining7978]

You got it, we will have it up on KZbin on the 1st of April!

[@obeewankanobee4351]

@@streetcoptraining7978 Y’all are the best! Looking forward to it !

[@joetripi3255]

When you talk to a judge you must say yes or no

[@1015BJJ]

Thank you keep it up!

[@streetcoptraining7978]

You bet! Thank you for your support

[@mightymovse]

I assure you, criminals are not the only people concerned about privacy in their vehicles. Many Americans value constitutionally protected privacy rights, despite them being law abiding citizens. That being said, great video. I’m binge watching everything on the channel now.

[@andrewdavid5928]

In reality a cop will just tell whatever lie is required to get what they want. The truth means less to the police than an empty doughnut box.

[@gfy2979]

well said!

[@artofvalor9396]

Awesome content! Great educational videos for law enforcement. Keep the vids coming!

[@streetcoptraining7978]

You got it! let us know if you have any video suggestions

[@cannabismediacollective]

Much appreciated!

[@streetcoptraining7978]

Glad to help!

[@SamuelSaman-o3m]

Those the vehicle exception rule apply for a traffic stop when driver was arrested for driving without a license, when passenger in car challenge the search the car cause he was the owner of car.

[@polachelliot91]

I'm confused; Who has heavier weighted legal authority to offer legal advice to the general public? The police (regardless of rank) or licensed attorneys admitted to the corresponding state bar?

[@LK-wz4dh]

HI, WA, OR does not have the automobile exception

[@EddieLeal]

Carroll Doctrine: The doctrine derives from the 1925 case of Carroll v. the United States, in which bootleg whiskey being smuggled into Michigan from Canada was seized in a search of the suspect's automobile under circumstances unrelated to a search incident to lawful arrest. The exigency for this type of search arises from the mobility of the automobile, which sets cars or any other mobile vehicles apart from the constitutionally protected, immobile threshold of the home. Probable cause is the second requirement needed to legitimize a warrantless search under the Carroll Doctrine. Because the scope of search incident law was broad, the Carroll Doctrine remained undeveloped in ensuing decades. Since the case of Chimel in 1969, in a period of restricted interpretation of search incident, other cases have contributed to the fleshing out of the Carroll Doctrine, defining the perimeters of warrantless search in terms of sections of the vehicle or police relocation of the vehicle.

[@eddiepereira9628]

Awesome stuff love the content.

[@streetcoptraining7978]

Glad to hear it!

[@TexasBoyJc]

Can you please inform me if Tennessee state statue says that citizens have to HAVE to give us (LEO) their ID on a citizen encounter?

[@seanpm3148]

Can you help me to understand Abel V. US / instrumentalities of a crime?

[@williamhegele2151]

Automobile or motor vehicle? You switched.

[@jerryschneider145]

Question: An officer walks up to the driver's window after a traffic stop and says "I smell marijuana." Is this sufficient probable cause to search the vehicle?

[@iapanitiumalu5033]

Depends on the officers training. A patrol officer vs a narcs experience is different in determining pc but yes it is probable cause.

[@jerryschneider145]

@@iapanitiumalu5033 Well it should not be, it is too easy to abuse.

[@s1krrpilot]

but it is, dont carry shit on you

[@joseocasio4311]

Not in New Jersey

[@jerryschneider145]

@@joseocasio4311 Exactly

[@ethanbeck3144]

Shoutout from Southeast VA!

[@streetcoptraining7978]

Whats up!!!

[@nigelmarshallkenyonabbott8684]

You think they're having this discussion in Mexico?

[@LK-wz4dh]

Lol no. Mexico cops are super corrupt. They do whatever they want

[@Arykperry]

All these rules are ridiculous. Everyone knows if your not an officer then your a criminal. I think officers should be able to go anywhere they want anytime they want, grab a dirty citizen off the street , taze them, flip them upside down to empty those pockets and keep the money……. An if ya like his wife take her too!!!!

[@kristeneichhorn6913]

Wow! You clearly have no idea how incredibly foolish your statement is and even worse how foolish you are if you wholeheartedly believe the words you wrote! Cops doing all those things to criminals is all fine and good, but what you don't seem to have any fucking clue about is the fact that YOU just might find yourself on the receiving end of police enforcing the laws they believe YOU have broken even if you have done NOTHING wrong. I bet you would change your mind pretty fucking fast if you were the one being thrown to the ground having your pockets emptied your money taken and being hauled off to jail when you haven't committed a crime. THIS HAPPENS EVERYDAY to inocent people minding their own business. Some power hungry bully with a badge spots a victim and God help the person they have targeted! Since we are children we are taught that the cops are there to protect and serve. No one tells you that if you don't protect yourself from the police you will serve time in prison. the justice system has nothing to do with justice and doing the right thing, it just is the way it is no matter how fucked the courts decisions are in the end. Lastly you are guilty until proven inocent! NOT the other way around. If we were inocent until proven guilty we wouldn't be put in jail and treated as criminals until courts can make a ruling.

[@s.collins1966]

21:00

[@spiderzvow1]

coward teachers other people how to be a coward