How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site.
    Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask AttyDort Your Own Question
AttyDort
AttyDort, Litigation Attorney
Category: Criminal Law
Satisfied Customers: 96
Experience:  Criminal and Civil jury trial expeirence; 17 yrs exp in state and federal courts.
67981144
Type Your Criminal Law Question Here...
AttyDort is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

Here is my question, my son was pulled over pickup being too

Customer Question

here is my question, my son was pulled over for his pickup being too loud, he plead not guilty as it does have glass packs on it. we got the video from the car because he plead not guilty in the video the officer does not look under the truck to see if it has a muffler, just assumes it has straight pipes which it does not have. the officer then makes a call to the lieutenant that complained to see if he will be the complainant on the ticket if he writes him a citation. he tells him he can be his own complainant as he heard it too, the conversation continues and then they decide to just him a warning, then the officer that pulled him over tells the lieutenant my sons name then he say write him up he knows better and that he is a little shit, so I feel like it is discrimination because of his name it was also the first time he had been pulled over for his pipes
Submitted: 1 year ago.
Category: Criminal Law
Expert:  AttyDort replied 1 year ago.

If your son was giving a citation (I cannot tell what code sections he was charged with), he has the right to a trial. If he feels there was no violation, he should demand that trial and try to win it (I assume this is an infraction, not a misdemeanor crime).

Then the questions - would the conversation between the officer and the lieutenant be admissible in evidence for that trial?

The answer is no. It's not relevant to the question of whether or not a violation existed. Either the violation existed or not It the vehicle did in fact violate the vehicle code (I assume that is what code we are talking about here), then he is guilty. If it did not, he is innocent.

If your son wants to win a trial on this sort of infraction, he should focus on gathering the evidence he will need to prove the vehicle was in compliance with the law.

Now, I supposed it is possible here to challenge the legality of the stop, based upon the idea that he was pulled over without probable cause because the officers knew him. Then, only after they stopped him illegally, did they find a reason to write a citation.

If those were the facts, a suppression motion would be the right way to request dismissal due to an illegal stop. Such a motion would argue that the police violated the 4th Amendment to the US Constitution prior to the stop.

However, if the officer did have a reasonable suspicion, based upon specific facts he observed, that the vehicle was in violation of a statue, the stop will be legal.

Does it matter that they decided not to give him a warning because they knew him and did not like him? No. That information will not help your son win the trial or get the citation dismissed.

It might be frustrating, but it will not help your son establish that he is innocent of the alleged violation. To win that trial, your son will have to show the vehicle complied with the law and that the officer is wrong.

(or perhaps proof of correction if it is a correctable offense).

It is not illegal discrimination to deny someone a warning because they know that person.

In general, illegal discrimination is defined as denying someone a right based upon their religion, race, skin color, sexual orientation, gender identity, or age (in some cases).

Getting a warning is not a right that can be illegally denied.

If they gave him a ticket that he was innocent of because he was Jewish, or stopped him illegally because he had a Muslim beard, then it would be illegal discrimination.

Hope that helps.

Follow up questions?