Can a police officer stop a vehicle for a traffic violation on private property (such as a hotel parking lot)?
548242
You didn't say what state you're in, and that makes a huge difference.  Your question is (evidently) a little unclear for some folks, too...so let's see if we can clarify at least that part of it:\n\nIt looks to me like what you're asking is if the police can stop you for a traffic violation committed on private property.  As an example, maybe you're wanting to know if you can be stopped at the local hotel for not stopping at a stop sign erected by the hotel on their property, having a headlight out, or driving five miles an hour faster than what the hotel's signs say you should.\n\nIn California, the answer is generally no.  The California Vehicle Code generally does not apply to private property, though there are some notable exceptions (DUI, reckless driving, etc).  The examples I cited above are not illegal in California.\n\nIf I've got that wrong...and what you want to know is if you can be stopped on private property for a violation you committed on public property...the answer in California, and I'd bet in every state in the union, is yes.\n\nBut really, if you want a reliable answer you need to explain what state you're in, and if you're talking about a specific violation, you need to talk about that too.  There are just too many variables that can apply without any additional information.
543345
Yes they should.  They are officers to, no matter what their position is. They are still wearing a badge and they are still there for our protection. They have to know the law to so shur they should be able to give out tickets.  Be easy on them, just imagine being outside in the strange weather to give out tickets because of people parking wrong. Sorry to hear about the ticket. At least it doesn't show on the driving record.
1122799
Not unless your city has a speicfic local code about it.\n\nAnd of course it is a public street ( not private) and it is on a public right of way, not blocking someones drive.\n\nso let her call the police, if we are wrong the worst they should do is merley ask you to move it.\n\nOr if you live in Atlanta, they will laugh at the lady on the phone, since they are so busy they don't even come if your car has been broken into ( they really don't, they merley tell you to call and report it over the phone the next day)
684757
The poster above me almost has it right. The police CAN pull you over if they know you don't have a driver's license or it is suspended. They have to have personal knowledge to the fact, such as they have stopped you before or have checked it in the system. They need no other reason after that. It is a misdemeanor to drive without one or with a suspended one.
1181459
You've written an awful lot of stuff here just to ask if the cops can pull someone over for "no reason."\n\nDoubtful.  \n\nIf the state you're writing about has a law that allows police to stop vehicles to check for current insurance (and for no other reason), then I would have to say the police can do that.  \n\nIf there's no such law in your state that allows that, it's going to be every bit as impossible to give you a good answer as Van Winkle says (and his was generally a very good answer).  You don't have anywhere near all the facts, so there's no way you can present them to anyone to get a decent answer.  \n\nAs for all the other stuff you wrote, did you have a question about it?  I see plenty of answers, but you never asked any questions.\n\nDon't get overly excited when you read people's answers here talking about search and seizure issues because based on what you wrote here, I doubt there are any.  \n\nPost more if you want to know more.\n\nEDIT 6.11.06:\n\nWow!\n\nOkay, let's see what we can do here.\n\nNeed to know what state you're in.  Sorry I didn't mention that before, I should have.  States have different laws, and the very best answer will come to you from someone who knows that State's law on these issues.  However, these are mostly constitutional questions, so I can probably give you some decent answers (because the Constitution applies in all states).\n\n1.  Generally, yes.  If it's stolen, it's contraband, and nobody has the right to possess contraband.  It would be like trying to argue that the police couldn't take your heroin without a warrant or consent...they can, because it's contraband.  NOTE: this is only as to the seizure of the item, not the search.  \n\n2.  Almost impossible to answer.  Really, none of these questions are all that "answerable," without knowing exactly what the facts were.  There are times when the police can enter uninvited and without a warrant, and there are times they cannot.  I wish I could go into this more with you, but you're talking about hours and hours of search and seizure law here, to be able to cover all the possibilities.\n\n3.  Your family can always file a complaint with the officer's employer.  I have no idea what the outcome of that could be, of course.\n\n4.  I don't know how you know "for sure" some of the property wasn't stolen, so it's difficult to address this.  Assuming you really do know the status of the property you're referring to, you should contact the law enforcement agency that seized the property and give them a statement as to the status of the property.  Do not waste your time by telling them things like, "it's my brother's, and my brother would never steal anything" or, "the neighbor gave it to my brother last year and my neighbor wouldn't have stolen it" because you just don't know those things to be 100% factual.  Perfectly innocent people can sometimes trade or give away stolen property without knowing it, but it doesn't mean the property isn't every bit as stolen.\n\nYou've repeatedly said that you stay out of the drama (wise decision, by the way), so I'm guessing that you really don't have all the facts.  If you weren't there at the time all this happened, you really aren't in a good position to know all the intimate details for certain, and it's the details that can really make a difference.  \n\nI don't know for sure that it's working, but if you'd like you're welcome to click on my avatar-thingy up there and contact me for some more discussion on this issue.  It's probably about to be beaten to death here, and I admire the reasonable tone of your questions.
125177
US Boarder Patrol are Federal Law Enforcement Officers, they have Federal power of arrest.\n\nUnless they are doing regular road blocks doing spot checks and the such,  they will need "reasonal suspection" to do a traffic stop.  Reasonable cause is what is needed for a search warrant,\n\nBut honestly beleive me as a past law enforcement officer, I can pick almost any vechile that passes and there is something either on or about the vechile that would allow it to be stoped, and if not, within 2 miles of following them they will do something wrong.\n\nAnd of course if the claim you were crossing the yellow line, who is going to not beleive them
302019
In CA , if the police officer can develop probable cause, he can search your car. This was put in place due to the mobility of vehicles. They can simply drive away before you can get a search warrant.\n\nThe simplest example is the smell of pot. If the officer smells it, he can search anywhere in the car where the pot might be. Anywhere. \n\nAnother example is the plain sight rule. If the officer sees contraband in plain sight he can seize it and search your car for more. Anything else reasonably found during the search is also legally obtained.\n\nI don't know where the other posters got their information, but whether or not you are a minor has no bearing.\n\nAs for the cocaine issue, what crime did the driver get charged with? What are you talking about? If a passenger has drugs on them, it is possible that the driver could be charged for transportation of drugs. As for claiming they didn't know about the drugs, would it surprise you to know that people lie to the police??
876487
That is true. Cops in illinois has jurisdiction everywhere. They are sworn officers of the state not of their city or municipality. Now the jurisdiction people talk about is whether to stop a car or not. IE Chicago PD cant go to waukeegan and stop a car for blowing a stop sign BUT if there was a reckless driver they can be stopped for public safety. Also, lets say a Rockford Police officer came to Chicago to pick up known gangbanger. Lets say he knocks on the door and the guy that answers (not the gangbanger) has a joint in his mouth, he would be arrested by that rockford cop in chicago.
1053198
Whoever told you that is wrong.  \n\nYou're talking about some fairly complicated jurisdictional issues.  There are many, many situations where police can and do exercise jurisdiction on private property.
192768
Is the parking lot really private? If the public can access it freely (i.e. there is no gate or lock), or even if a select group of the public, like in a gated community, can access the parking lot, it is not private, and you must follow the rules of the road there. If it was truly private, the officer would need a warrant or have seen you while driving on the street and have a reasonable suspicion about your drinking to even go into the lot.
48249
Georgia has a law called "loitering and prowling."  While not verbatim, it states that a person that is in a place not normal and acting in a way that is cause for alarm is committing a criminal offense.\n\nTherefore, if you have someone riding slowly around a neighborhood at 3 a.m. where they don't belong then you have enough to stop them.\n\nAlso, the word probable cause is *WAY* overused.  The standard to perform a traffic stop is "reasonable suspicion".  Probable cause is required to write a ticket or to make an arrest.\n\nReasonable suspicion means that a reasonable person would think that a crime has occurred, is occurring, or is about to occur.  This is all that is required to make a traffic stop.
254943
If they can arrest a person on private property, why would they not be able to radar a person on private property? Granted, if on private property they are likely focused on the matter in the area, perhaps a domestic dispute, but why would there be an expectation of privacy when you pass private property, upon which a police officer, is via a car? \n\nNow, if you mean the whole area, including the road, is private property, then I would assume no, as the presence of the police must be based on cause, which could be as simple as a neighbor calling in about suspicious noises. However, once on the property, the police's powers, while possibly limited if they are present because of a search warrant, still exist in terms of monitoring and apprehension. If a person is speeding on the property, unless that speeding, or other type of driving, is lawful on the property, the police would have reason to use a radar gun, or just to detain the person and possibly arrest him. At the very least, the matter is best understood by knowing what kind of driving may be performed on what kind of property.   \n\nIn either case, my strong suspicion is that they can in some cases.
885922
Sorry, but I'm on the sheriff's side.  If you don't pay a fine, even for a seatbelt ticket, then a warrant's usually issued.  If you can't post bond, you go to jail.  The price for lack of responsibility is sometimes steep.  Along similar lines, here in Missouri if you bounce a check to the DMV and don't make good on it they'll enter a seize order into the computer & any police officer stopping you can remove your license plates & mail them back to the DMV.
164922
As a former Texas police officer, I can tell you that the guy that is doing it on purpose could be charged with Criminal Mischief if the owner of the property choses to press charges. If it's an accident, then the owner can take the driver(s) to civil court and sue for the damage to the lawn. No one has the right to hurt someone else's property and the one guy that is doing it on purpose needs a charge slapped on his butt and then he can sit in his jail cell and spin his wheels. He can also be sued for the damage. If the owner wants to press charges, tell them to get it on video if possible. Hide a camera somewhere and then they have their proof. =)
217481
For legal guidance, consult an attorney.  Three percent of all public parking lots must be reserved for handicapped spaces.  It's just good business--and socially the right thing to do.  Regardless of that, I know how upsetting it is when you make an unfortunate mistake and park your car in a space that is marked.  It's similiar when you run a red light because you didn't notice, or go into an HOV lane because you were distracted or on a cell phone.  Good luck to you!
596108
It will depend on what HS was doing it,  most medium and large police departments have Homeland Security officers appointed in it.  All of the state police units I know, including some of the larger college police units all have homeland secuity officers also.\n\nIf the officer has been sworn in as a state, county or city police yes they may.\n\nMany times the vechiles have specific names and the officers assigned to varouis units, but this will not mean they don't have other powers of arrest.\n\nin general those that work at the Federal level would not be doing traffic stops
1151367
Then both drivers "left the scene of an accident"  and that's not legal.  It may be your car but it's our highway(taxes)  and DLs aren't rights it is a privilege the state can and will revoke for little things.  A police report has to be made on State and Federal highways.  But hey, no cops no foul.  I'd take the $1000 and go too.