Were my friends legally arrested?

Question

So to start off this wasn't me, and it happened in the state of California. Anyhow, onto the story:

My friend's brother was driving his van and they had one passenger. They were pulled over for a broken taillight, the van wreaked of marijuana from what the police officers said although there was no marijuana in the van. They were all arrested, the older brother was assaulted by 3 police officers and the brother was hit with a DUI as well as a DWI. The van is now impounded and the older brother (the driver) had to spend the night in jail. Is this legal? Would they be able to get their van back without paying impound fees if they took the case to court? The whole situation sounds ridiculous to me.

Some additional details:

I am not related to these people, they are friends from school. Nobody was drinking, there was no marijuana actually in the van. I don't doubt that they got mouthy to the officer but I highly doubt any of them would or did resist arrest.

None of these answers are really helpful, most of the answers are "well if it smelled like it, it must be so" which may be reason enough in some places, but here there has to be physical evidence, at least a drug test, although it would be difficult to tell from a drug test if they were impaired at the time, or were impaired the previous day since THC stays in your system a while.

Also, why blatantly assume that they were resisting arrest? Is it impossible that there are police who mess up on occaison? They are human too right? Or am I wrong? I just want the answer to the question given the circumstances listed.

DWI = Driving While Intoxicated.

Thanks, I'm getting some good insight. I know that my friend left out a lot of information. They all want to move to Europe. Although they are nice kids all they do is complain about the establishment, good riddance. I have nothing against police and I don't dab into controlled substances. I am actually going into law enforcement soon. Seems like 2 or 3 people offered some good insight, too bad I can't pick more than 1 best answer.

Answer 1

1

Answer 2

Lets review the facts, taking into account that neither of us were there.

1.) There was a valid reason for the police to stop the van (broken taillight).

2.) Once the van was stopped, the odor of Marijuana inside gives the officers the authority (probable cause) to search the vehicle and to expand the stop to investigate a possible crime or crimes.

3.) During this investigation, the driver was found to be impaired by alcohol or drugs, and was arrested.

You haven't given many other details, but let me take a guess at what actually happened, since I 100% GUARENTEE you that you didn't get the whole truth:

As they are making the arrest of the driver and passengers for whatever charges they had, someone got mouthy and resisted arrest and was forcibly subdued, now he is complaining of an "assault" due to his lack of responsibility in the situation.

You got one side of a story... I wonder what the officer's side would say?

Answer 3

Legal

The broken tail light was enough cause for the officer to pull the van over. Once the van is stopped then it is subject to a search in Texas, in California the laws are tougher and the officer can only use the "What is in plain sight rule."

The reek of marijuana was enough probably cause for the officer to suspect drug use. Anything that happened after that came out of the tail light incident and the "in plain sight" marijuana.

If the driver was found to be impaired, DWI or DUI then they are guilty of a crime and so will have to go to court. The van was legally impounded and both the men in the situation are in trouble and are in the wrong.

Answer 4

The stop was legal. The odor of marijuana allows the officer(s) to search the van. The driver's arrest for DWI is valid (as long as there was probable cause for the DWI arrest) since driving under the influence of marijuana is as illegal as driving under the influence of alcohol.
Since police don't normally assault people I would guess there was some sort of assault on law enforcement officer or resist charges for the others. Not to mention the fact that smoking marijuana is also illegal.
My department's policy is that if the vehicle can not be operated by one of the other occupants (who are apparently stoned-unfit to drive) or some other third party that is readily available then the vehicle is towed.
You left some details out that would help my assessment out (such as what everyone was charged with) but I have a sneaking feeling that this is another case of "I had a friend who...."

Answer 5

Yes that is a legal arrest. The fact that the police smelled the pot is more than enough proof. Logically, if the van "reeked" of pot it's because someone was smoking it.

You say your brother was assaulted, but not the circumstances that led to the alleged assault. Did your brother get brave and try to run or do something else to provoke the officers? It sounds odd that three cops would just assault him.

As for getting the van back without having to pay for it; that won't happen. First, it was a legal arrest, so your brother or whoever owns the van is responsible.

Secondly, the longer you wait the more expensive it will be to get it out. If they wait to long whoever towed the van can file a mechanics lien on the van, get a salvage title and sell it.

Lastly, even if they won their court case, they can try and take the Police to small claims court, but they will have to pay for it initially and try to recoup their losses.

Answer 6

The car was pulled over for a valid reason (taillight).

This allows the officers to do a cursory look (or smell) of the car, and ask for ID and check for DUI, etc.

Based on the odor of marijuana, the officers could do a search of the passenger compartment. Based on the suspected DUI, the driver could be arrested.

Nothing you mentioned gives the police justification to attack anyone -- and force could only be used on the DUI driver if he resisted arrest.

As for impounding, if no drugs were found, and another licensed drive was present and available to drive (also not drunk), the I would argue that the impound of the van was improper -- but I'd have to check the specific caselaw to determine how strongly I'd argue that.

Answer 7

Well it's hard to tell from your story. Some of the people here will support the police, some will not. Your story sounds like some details are missing, but if the van smelled of marijuana and there was none, it could be they smoked it all. DUI requires a chemical test, so if they are not guilty the test will be negative.

Answer 8

I don't know about California, but in Washington, there are officer's who are known as DRE's (Drug Recognition Experts) They go through some intense training for this. They do almost like a field sobriety test like they would do for a drunk driver, but they are able to determine if the person is under the influence of drugs. The courts have ruled that if a DRE can has probable cause to believe that they are under the influence of drugs, that is sufficient for an arrest.

Answer 9

First of all, law enforcement officials (for essentially the most aspect) don't violate our constitutional rights, of direction no division is best and it has absolutely occurred earlier than. While they do at a few occasions intimidate men and women into consenting to searches, it's partially the character's fault for no longer understanding their rights to refuse a seek until a courtroom order is produced. Secondly, there are corrupt firemen identical to there are corrupt policemen, similar to firemen commencing fires simply to place them out to get the honour and compliment. Finally, law enforcement officials are those who come on your residence if anyone is breaking in, who hold our streets risk-free for our kids. Without them, society might be terrible. Police officials simply get far more crap then firemen for the reason that there are extra circumstances of corrupt police than firefighters, and the police reports are extra publicized. I cannot suppose an international with out both of the 2 nevertheless. If you had ever been a sufferer of crime (no longer that I desire that on you, this can be a terrible factor no person will have to must revel in), maybe you might higher realise their value extra.

Answer 10

In my 16 years that I lived in California I got pulled over many many times for speeding and I never had an experience like that. Police could sometimes be jerks, but they would never search my car, impound it or arrest me or beat me up for no reason and I am a minority.
If they got arrested they will have their day in court, make sure they get a good lawyer.
Don't get offended, but I think your friends are low lifes. I find your story hard to believe.