remember this is the same court that decided that obamacare was a tax. these people are birds of a feather. they will do what ever it takes to protect each other.

First let me say that driving laws vary significantly from state to state as to what constitutes a driving violation.
Once stopped for a VALID reason, then the officer CAN use "probable cause" to extend the search.
North Carolina:
http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/EnactedLegis...
Now the specific statute in North Carolina, uses both singular AND plural of the word stop lamp(s) Section g makes clear that any vehicle made after 1955, MUST have at least one stop lamp. Paragraph (d) makes it VERY clear that " shall have all originally equipped rear lamps or the equivalent in good working order." which means NOT broken or burnt out.
§ 20-129.1. Additional lighting equipment required on certain vehicles.
(d) Rear Lamps. - Every motor vehicle, and every trailer or semitrailer attached to a motor vehicle and every vehicle which is being drawn at the end of a combination of vehicles, shall have all originally equipped rear lamps or the equivalent in good working order, which lamps shall exhibit a red light plainly visible under normal atmospheric conditions from a distance of 500 feet to the rear of such vehicle. One rear lamp or a separate lamp shall be so constructed and placed that the number plate carried on the rear of such vehicle shall under like conditions be illuminated by a white light as to be read from a distance of 50 feet to the rear of such vehicle. Every trailer or semitrailer shall carry at the rear, in addition to the originally equipped lamps, a red reflector of the type which has been approved by the Commissioner and which is so located as to height and is so maintained as to be visible for at least 500 feet when opposed by a motor vehicle displaying lawful undimmed lights at night on an unlighted highway.
(g) No person shall sell or operate on the highways of the State any motor vehicle, motorcycle or motor-driven cycle, manufactured after December 31, 1955, unless it shall be equipped with a stop lamp on the rear of the vehicle. The stop lamp shall display a red or amber light visible from a distance of not less than 100 feet to the rear in normal sunlight, and shall be actuated upon application of the service (foot) brake. The stop lamp may be incorporated into a unit with one or more other rear lamps. (1937, c. 407, s. 92; 1939, c. 275; 1947, c. 526; 1955, c. 1157, ss. 3-5, 8; 1957, c. 1038, s. 1; 1967, cc. 1076, 1213; 1969, c. 389; 1973, c. 531, ss. 1, 2; 1979, c. 175; 1981, c. 549, s. 1; 1985, c. 66; 1987, c. 611; 1989 (Reg. Sess., 1990), c. 822, s. 1; 1991, c. 18, s. 1; 1999-281, s. 1.)
4Th Amendment:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Now if the officer AFTER stopping the vehicle notices in PLAIN sight an open beer bottle, gun, bongs, or smells pot smoke, (which is VERY distinct), Then the officer has probable cause.
Now let's look at "reasonable AND probable Cause, and please keep in mind this is based on STATE Laws which are the applicable rules. the US Supreme Court has no jurisdiction if the State Laws do not violate the constitution, which in this case it does not appear to.
In the individual case being referred to, we must ask a few questions.
1)What was the probable cause? Broken tail light is NOT probable cause.
2)Were there serious issues with the license, registration, and insurance?

The Supremes in this case got it right, and Sotomayer must not be able to actually READ what the state statutes clearly state. Furthermore, the officer was RIGHT not mistaken, unless she was driving something made before 1955.

I perceived myself as out of the loop due to missing details myself.
Writing the above, I imagined the errant brake light cop finding Cheech and Chong high was kites with a strong smell of pot and an ash tray stuffed with roaches (not the insect kind).
What is an errant brake light cop now to do?

This one makes my stomach churn, and begs the question is time yet for another tea party?

Thanks - Don't forget K

:)

I think that the case against illegal searches would have been clearer if the cop knowingly used a false pretense to stop and search. In this case, one can make a comparison to a cop trying to help one change a tire (yea, I know, that doesn't really happen) and seeing illegal drugs. I don't know the details of how the drugs were found - was the search made on a false pretext or were there obvious indications of illegal activity?

No kidding!

Hey db, I finally got time to start reading Pendulum of Justice on Sunday and I love it. I didn't want to put it down. I can't wait to finish but it may take me a couple weeks to get back to it. I will post a review when I get done. Such talent we have in the gulch! Nicely done!

I agree with the court on this one. The search was consented to by the driver. Had he not consented and the officer searched anyway, THEN we would have a problem.

He issued a warning, not a ticket/violation for the tail light. Which he is allowed to do even if the law does not require you to have more than 1 functioning light. Just like warnings for burned out headlights and the like.

However, since the driver consented to the officer's search request, anything found is allowed as evidence in other charges.

Bottom line, they should have said no to the search. If a search is conducted anyway, anything they find is disallowed as evidence because they search was conducted without consent or a warrant. I believe the only consent that matters in a case like this would be the driver, as operator of the vehicle.

... and end the government War On Drugs.

I am beginning to wonder if there was a night of the long knifes in the US if anyone would complain

Ignorantia juris non excusat
for you not for me.
AS non-fiction.

What has become of our country? I am shocked beyond words!

Aarrrgh! And the band played on and on.