Traffic Stop with Firearms in Car

[bissettbd]

You probably don't want to join this club.

http://articles.philly.com/2015-04-04/news/60790722_1_gun-laws-shaneen-allen-bersa-thunder


This woman admitted to having a firearm when asked by the NJSP (which is a common traffic stop question in NJ), at which point she was promptly arrested.

NY, NJ, and MD are not PA, TX, and FL.

Esqappellate nailed it when he said it is complicated. If you were stopped in NJ (at least in the late 80's) and you did not answer this question they would search your vehicle illegally anyway out of suspicion. So if you did not want to end up in jail, Option 1 and 2, telling the truth or remaining silent would not keep you out of jail. If you wanted to sleep at home in your own bed that night you only have one other option.

It would be wonderful if honest people could tell the truth and not end up in jail, but that is not a reality in about six states (NY,NJ,MD,MA,CA,HI). The reality is a firearms arrest in any of these hostile states is probably going to be a felony. Not telling the truth might be a misdemeanor in any of these states, and most probably is no crime at all. Which charge would you rather face? The math is not complicated. In addition, without an admission, any search may be thrown out in court for lack of probable cause. The search will never be thrown out if you make an admission however.

This is not legal advice or advice at all.

 

[Blacksmith101]

A 100%. However if im asked 'is there anything I should know about in the vehicle?' I will say there is a gun if theres a gun. Theres absolutely nothing wrong with being honest. As far as im concerned, a police officer should know about a gun inside my vehicle. You guys may say different. Id rather them know about it ahead of time, than to have them find it without notice. Carrying a hypodermic needle isnt illegal either, but if the cop finds it and you didn't mention you had it prior to them seeing it, youll probably be doing a lot more explanation then I would. Calling me an idiot for being honest? That guys lost his mind.

no regerts

If it is not being transported illegally and poses no danger to the officer why should he know about it? The gun is not going to load itself and jump out of the trunk and attack the officer.

"....'is there anything I should know about in the vehicle?'

 

[HordesOfKailas]

Also I should add, in the several times I've been pulled over (all for speeding or having dead bulbs, nothing serious), I've never been asked if there's"something [the cop] should know about".

 

[Norton]

Oh, the moderator will be knocking on my door shortly and likely hand me a restraining order...I have not been counseled lately. I am old, crusty, been through hell and high water and SURVIVED. I sound off and let er rip when I cannot deal with the ingrates who show up here from time to time.

Lew--Ranger63
Laurel, MD 20769

There's your restraining order. See you in two weeks. It's one thing to say something that you shouldn't have to another member, but then to basically admit that you don't give a damn about saying it is even more special.

 

[marylandmark]

Hope whatever happened has been resolved such that you lost no rights or property. I'm guessing that I can't say the same for time and money.

Rights and property restored, time and money gone, lingering effects of the event will leave me scarred forever.

Hmmm, a big part of me wants to say spill your guts, but I would respect your privacy if you didn't.

In due time but soon.

 

[Doctor_M]

Glad you are OK and you got your property returned. When you are ready to talk about it, I'm sure there are many here who would like to hear about your encounter. It may be a good educational moment for those on the forum.

 

[Blaster229]

I think I will say that either scenario, admitting or not declaring firearms during a traffic stop, yields a negative or positive result equally.

 

[redeemed.man]

I think I will say that either scenario, admitting or not declaring firearms during a traffic stop, yields a negative or positive result equally.

look at you, the voice of reason....

 

[Blaster229]

look at you, the voice of reason....

Look at you. Being able to sort through my vague comment like some dude going through a woman's forgotten laundry in an apartment complex dryer late at night.

 

[Doctor_M]

Boundless and Blaster... twins in the soft lacy double barreled slingshot of logic

 

[redeemed.man]

Look at you. Being able to sort through my vague comment like some dude going through a woman's forgotten laundry in an apartment complex dryer late at night.

LMAO

 

[swinokur]

Blaster is slipping?

 

[ras_oscar]

This is complicated. First, making a false statement to a FEDERAL LEO is a felony in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1001. That covers "whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully (1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact; (2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or (3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry; shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years or, if the offense involves international or domestic terrorism (as defined in section 2331), imprisoned not more than 8 years, or both. Ask Martha Stewart about Section 1001. Lesson: Don't lie to the FBI (or any other Federal Leo), if you don't want to respond, invoke your right to be silent and your right to counsel.

MD State law is different. Md. Code Ann., Crim. Law § 9-501 (recodifying former Art. 27, § 150), provides that “(a) A person may not make, or cause to be made, a statement, report, or complaint that the person knows to be false as a whole or in material part, to a law enforcement officer of the State, of a county, municipal corporation, or other political subdivision of the State, or of the Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Police with intent to deceive and to cause an investigation or other action to be taken as a result of the statement, report, or complaint." That's a misdemeanor that makes the person "subject to imprisonment not exceeding 6 months or a fine not exceeding $500 or both."

In Johnson v. Maryland, 75 Md.App. 621 (Ct. of Sp. Appeals 1988), cert denied 316 Md. 675 (1989), the intermediate court of appeals of Maryland applied Maryland precedent and held that "we do not believe the giving of false information in response to routine questioning by the police, even though it is likely to hinder or delay an investigation already underway, is the type of false statement, report or complaint that comes within the “false alarm” public mischief the General Assembly intended to criminalize when it enacted § 150" Rather, the statute covers "the making of false reports to the police which cause the police to conduct investigations that divert them from their proper duties of preventing crime and investigating actual incidents of crime." That's much more narrow than Section 1001.

This holding in Johnson was confirmed by the MD Court of Appeals in Jones v. State, 362 Md. 331, 765 A.2d 127 (2001), which reaffirmed its post-Johnson prior opinion in Choi v. State, 316 Md. 529, 560 A.2d 1108 (1989). The Court stated in Jones that "under Choi, the offense of making a false statement to a police officer is not committed by one who, during an ongoing investigation, answers an investigating police officer's inquiries untruthfully. The offense is only committed by one whose false statement causes the police initially to undertake an investigation or other action" (765 A.2d at 130). See also In re Heather B. 369 Md. 257, 799 A.2d 397 (2002).

This is not to say that lying to a state LEO is ok and I am not recommending it. It just may not be criminal, in and of itself, in very specific circumstances. This can get complicated very quickly. Consult your lawyer.

And yet when the officer is questioning you, they are permitted to be untruthful

 

[swinokur]

Sad but true.

ETA-the post advising people to lie has apparently been removed by the staff.

thanks guys.

 

[rseymorejr]

A 100%. However if im asked 'is there anything I should know about in the vehicle?' I will say there is a gun if theres a gun. Theres absolutely nothing wrong with being honest. As far as im concerned, a police officer should know about a gun inside my vehicle. You guys may say different. Id rather them know about it ahead of time, than to have them find it without notice. Carrying a hypodermic needle isnt illegal either, but if the cop finds it and you didn't mention you had it prior to them seeing it, youll probably be doing a lot more explanation then I would. Calling me an idiot for being honest? That guys lost his mind.

no regerts

So, do you tell them about the shovel, jumper cables, tire iron, carpet knife, snow chains or screwdriver in the trunk too? They are just as relevant as a legally owned and transported gun in your vehicle. Why does he need to know about an unloaded, cased gun in the vehicle?

 

[rseymorejr]

I was taught from a young age not to volunteer any information to a cop or judge. If they ask a direct question I will give a truthful answer.
The proper answer to the question: "Do you know what time it is?" is "Yes, I do". Wait for the follow up question of "What time is it?" before you say 12:30.
Most people screw themselves when asked a question, the ramble on and on until they've painted themselves into a corner.

 

[Brooklyn]

A 100%. However if im asked 'is there anything I should know about in the vehicle?' I will say there is a gun if theres a gun. Theres absolutely nothing wrong with being honest. As far as im concerned, a police officer should know about a gun inside my vehicle. You guys may say different. Id rather them know about it ahead of time, than to have them find it without notice. Carrying a hypodermic needle isnt illegal either, but if the cop finds it and you didn't mention you had it prior to them seeing it, youll probably be doing a lot more explanation then I would. Calling me an idiot for being honest? That guys lost his mind.

no regerts

First hypodermic needles are controlled so it may in fact be unlawful.

Second why does he need to know about your gun?

If he asks for permission to search..it may be because he or she knows the search is not lawful otherwise.. at which point shut up.

Or pay the price.

IANAL..

 

[notfast]

First hypodermic needles are controlled so it may in fact be unlawful.

Needles can be purchased w/o a script in any MD pharmacy.

They can be considered paraphernalia if there is evidence of their use being related to a CDS.

Simply possessing a hypodermic needle is not necessarily unlawful.

 

[moojersey]

I would just go on a rant about how he is violating my rights, then start grabbing for my guns to show him how cool they look.

 

[Brooklyn]

Needles can be purchased w/o a script in any MD pharmacy.

They can be considered paraphernalia if there is evidence of their use being related to a CDS.

Simply possessing a hypodermic needle is not necessarily unlawful.

Thanks for the clarification.

Not all jurisdictions are as friendly I suppose..but that may have changed as well..