Date of Offense
Complaint
Statement
Officer violated constitutional rights of subject as well as her own department's policy and procedures regarding unreasonable search and seizures. Violation of Sacramento County Regional Parks protocol 310.4 b. This officer did not explain a valid reason for the search that would be conducted and in fact was denied by the subject for search. Also the reports were inaccurate as the arresting officer was not listed on the report anywhere however there was a officer who was not involved at the scene or in the search listed as the arresting officer. As far as constitutional violations. The search violated the subject's 4th amendment rights : case people v. Blake's. Also the impoundment was not warranted under community care taking doctrine. The United States supreme Court held at the 4th amendment does not permit law enforcement to search the vehicle of a person who has been cited but not arrested for a traffic violation thereby rejecting application of what was called a search incident to citation, exception to the fourth amendment's warrant requirement. United States v. Edwards, 242 f 3d 928, 938 (CA10 2001). United States v. People v. Lopez, the California supreme Court included that the desire to obtain a driver's identification following a traffic stop does not constitute an independent categorical exception to the fourth amendment's warrant requirement permitting a search of a vehicle.
