[Lawman_Kyle]

No worries, I'm in PA and no longer an LEO in Oklahoma. And I never citied anyone for modified exhaust . Just stopped them.

[StillwaterTownie]

Originally Posted by proudvoterofObama

I don't think I gave bad advice at all. You have rights and authority to execute said rights. I'm majoring in political science/pre-law and if that really happened and is the whole story, you should have fought it in court and not just had the charges "dismissed." You got to pay $1,000 donation to the local jail and no records to show the incident ever happened. Does that seem fair? So yes, if you opt out of a search there is a chance you will be apprehended. It's the people, like yourself, who get taken in that need to stand up for yourselves so the corrupt dept. can't continue to take advantage of people.

My lawyer never brought up that I could sue for illegal arrest. My donation was not to a jail, but to my lawyer and wrecker service. It all goes back to the arresting officer's opinion that I didn't do good enough on the sobriety test, so he believed he had good cause to arrest me, until weeks later when my blood test came back showing no alcohol content. Sometimes one is really assumed guilty until proven innocent as I was.

[mkfarnam]

Originally Posted by Lawman_Kyle

No worries, I'm in PA and no longer an LEO in Oklahoma. And I never citied anyone for modified exhaust . Just stopped them.

In California you won't find anyone with a modified exhaust or an uncompliant exhaust system. Every vehicle is insected before registration and must comply to all California Emission Control laws before thry're ollowed on the road. If it's burning oil (blowing blue smoke ou the tailpipe) or out of tune( blowing black smoke) you have 30 day to fix it or junk it.
Even lawn mowers have smog systems out there. That's why you see a sticker on some saying "Not to be sold in California"

[mrzip5000]

Also watch out if your going thru Ft Supply in Woodward co. The local has a real attitude!

[Lawman_Kyle]

Originally Posted by mrzip5000

Also watch out if your going thru Ft Supply in Woodward co. The local has a real attitude!

Ha, small world eh? My uncle is the fire chief in Ft. Supply. Are you talking about the LEO in the truck?

[Crosstimbers Okie]

Originally Posted by Lawman_Kyle

I know alot of departments don't follow that guideline.....

It's not a guideline, it's the law:

From §70-3311. Council on Law Enforcement Education and Training.

3. Every person who has not been certified as a police or peace officer and is duly appointed or elected as a police or peace officer shall hold such position on a temporary basis only, and shall, within one (1) year from the date of appointment or taking office, qualify as required in this subsection or forfeit such position; provided, however, effective November 1, 2004, every person who has not been certified as a police or peace officer and is duly appointed or elected as a police or peace officer shall hold such position on a temporary basis only, and shall, within six (6) months from the date of appointment or taking office, qualify as required in this subsection or forfeit such position. In computing the time for qualification, all service shall be cumulative from date of first appointment or taking office as a police or peace officer with any department in this state. The Council may extend the time requirement specified in this paragraph for good cause as determined by the Council. An elected police or peace officer shall be eligible to enroll in a basic police course in accordance with this subsection upon being elected. A duty is hereby imposed upon the employing agency to withhold payment of the compensation or wage of said unqualified officer. If the police or peace officer fails to forfeit the position or the employing agency fails to require the officer to forfeit the position, the district attorney shall file the proper action to cause the forfeiting of such position. The district court of the county where the officer is employed shall have jurisdiction to hear the case.

[Crosstimbers Okie]

Originally Posted by Versatile

Several lawmen have posted. How about some insight of what to do when getting rousted by these rogue cops.

First you have to read, understand fully, and learn to apply these:

OKLAHOMA STATUTES

Without understanding the rules of the game you are at the mercy of whoever claims to have authority to act and who has the gun on their hip.

But, at the side of the road is the wrong place to have a legal debate. The safest course of action is to exercise your absolute right to remain silent until you are granted immunity from prosecution.

Title 22 of Oklahoma Statutes governs the right to not be compelled to be a witness against yourself. That means you don't have to open your mouth. Period. You don't even have to identify yourself if you reasonably fear that that information can be used against you--which it nearly always can.

Specifically:

Title 22. Criminal Procedure

22‑15. Testimony against one's self ‑ Restraint during trial and prior to conviction.
No person can be compelled in a criminal action to be witness against himself; nor can a person charged with a public offense be subjected before conviction to any more restraint than is necessary for his detention to answer the charge, and in no event shall he be tried before a jury while in chains or shackles.

Regarding immunity from prosecution, Oklahoma Constitution, Article II Bill of rights says:

Any person having knowledge or possession of facts that tend to establish the guilt of any other person or corporation under the laws of the state shall not be excused from giving testimony or producing evidence, when legally called upon so to do, on the ground that it may tend to incriminate him under the laws of the state; but no person shall be prosecuted or subjected to any penalty or forfeiture for or on account of any transaction, matter, or thing concerning which he may so testify or produce evidence. All other provisions of the Constitution or the laws of this state in conflict with the provisions of this constitutional amendment are hereby expressly repealed.

[Crosstimbers Okie]

Originally Posted by Lawman_Kyle

If it can be proven then yes you can.

But make sure you were UNDER arrest. An LEO can detain you in handcuffs while conducting a field investigation for his "safety".

A "Reasonable Suspicion" "Terry Stop."

The US Supreme Court has also said that an individual is "under arrest" when a reasonable person in the subject’s shoes would feel like they were not free to leave under the circumstances. Florida v. Royer, 460 U.S. 491, 502, 103 S.Ct. 1319, 75 L.Ed.2d 229 (1983). It is NOT relevant what the officer thought -- only what officer said and did -- the test is an objective one, not a subjective one. Florida v. Bostick 111 S.Ct. 2382 (1991).

Bottom line is, an arrestee probably will not prevail in a suit against the officer and the department, but incriminating evidence will be excluded if challenged in federal court on Florida v. Royer & Florida v. Bostick grounds.

Too many such incidents will get a police chief replaced or a new sheriff elected in many places.

[Crosstimbers Okie]

Originally Posted by StillwaterTownie

My lawyer never brought up that I could sue for illegal arrest. My donation was not to a jail, but to my lawyer and wrecker service. It all goes back to the arresting officer's opinion that I didn't do good enough on the sobriety test, so he believed he had good cause to arrest me, until weeks later when my blood test came back showing no alcohol content. Sometimes one is really assumed guilty until proven innocent as I was.

It wasn't an illegal arrest. The officer had the authority to arrest you. It just turns out that the facts did not support that a crime was committed. That's why there are prosecutors and courts.

An illegal arrest occurs when an officer arrests you for an act which is not illegal. Happens more than you know because some cops in some places don't bother to know the law, they just enforce it.

Another form of illegal arrest is for an officer to arrest you for a crime that he has no jurisdiction to enforce. For instance, you are driving 35 mph on a municipal street that is posted as 20 mph and an Oklahoma Highway Patrol Trooper pulls you over and writes you a ticket for violating that city ordinance. OHP troopers have state jurisdiction and limited federal jurisdiction. They don't have the authority to enforce city ordinances any more than a FBI agent can arrest you for the same act.

Another form of illegal arrest is when an officer uses illegal or unnecessary force to make it.

Another form of illegal arrest is when an officer violates your due process rights. In most cases a arrest warrant is needed to enter a person's home and arrest them. Absent probable cause and exigent circumstances, warrantless arrests in the home are prohibited by the Fourth Amendment. Payton v. New York, 445 U.S. 573 (1980). Doing so anyway is an illegal arrest and a civil rights violation.

Along those lines, If the suspect named in the arrest warrant is believed to be within a third party's premises, and there is no consent to enter, a separate search warrant must also be obtained to search there for the intended arrestee. Steagald v. United States, 451 U.S. 204 (1981); Minnesota v. Olson, 495 U.S. 91; 109 L.Ed. 2d 85 (1990). Doing so anyway is an illegal arrest and a civil rights violation.

[mkfarnam]

Originally Posted by Crosstimbers Okie

It wasn't an illegal arrest. The officer had the authority to arrest you. It just turns out that the facts did not support that a crime was committed. That's why there are prosecutors and courts.

An illegal arrest occurs when an officer arrests you for an act which is not illegal. Happens more than you know because some cops in some places don't bother to know the law, they just enforce it.

Another form of illegal arrest is for an officer to arrest you for a crime that he has no jurisdiction to enforce. For instance, you are driving 35 mph on a municipal street that is posted as 20 mph and an Oklahoma Highway Patrol Trooper pulls you over and writes you a ticket for violating that city ordinance. OHP troopers have state jurisdiction and limited federal jurisdiction. They don't have the authority to enforce city ordinances any more than a FBI agent can arrest you for the same act.

Another form of illegal arrest is when an officer uses illegal or unnecessary force to make it.

Another form of illegal arrest is when an officer violates your due process rights. In most cases a arrest warrant is needed to enter a person's home and arrest them. Absent probable cause and exigent circumstances, warrantless arrests in the home are prohibited by the Fourth Amendment. Payton v. New York, 445 U.S. 573 (1980). Doing so anyway is an illegal arrest and a civil rights violation.

Along those lines, If the suspect named in the arrest warrant is believed to be within a third party's premises, and there is no consent to enter, a separate search warrant must also be obtained to search there for the intended arrestee. Steagald v. United States, 451 U.S. 204 (1981); Minnesota v. Olson, 495 U.S. 91; 109 L.Ed. 2d 85 (1990). Doing so anyway is an illegal arrest and a civil rights violation.

Then tell me this:
I had a simular incident as StillwaterTownie.
First, I don't drink.

This was on a 2 lane Mountain road. My truck was parked in a "turn off", where people can get out of their vehicle and view the city below.
An Officer pulled in front of my truck, ordered me out, made me do a sobriety test, (on an uneven surface), another officer pulled up, they talked and decided to take me in on a DUI. I was never read my rights, But when the results of my blood test came back, all the paperwork disappeared. Even my name on the Court room rouster.
Was that arrest legal?