PC question for all you legale eagles to be

[swifty]

I don't know where to post this, but most of you in here are pretty damn intelligent
so here goes.

I used to work as a commissioned courier. (read: the faster you deliver from point A to point B, the more money you make).  I already sense some inferences and preconceived notions! 

Anyways, I was headed out to the airport (Sacramento) to FedEx's package delivery terminal. 
Fedex used couriers for their missorts and home deliveries.  When I got out there I noticed Fedex had moved and when I got to the gate for entry to the loading docks, there was a fedex van in front of me who punched in the code and proceeded through the gate.  The gate closed after her, which is fine since there was a phone set right there for me to use.  However, the girl backed up, and the gate started to open, so I zipped on in and went directly to
the docks.  Problem.  The loading docks were on airport property, only fedex employees are allowed through that gate.  This was clearly marked on the gate, but hey, I am courier, I got places to go and things to deliver. I interptreted the driver's gesture as opening the gate for me, while she, as trained, was trying to block me from getting in before the gate closed.  No one knew the gate would start to reopen. (again, they had just moved to this area of the airport)

Before I knew it, i was swarmed by 1 Sherriff car and 2 FAA Vans.  (Btw, this happens all the time, and since the Sheriffs and FFA people never have anything to do they live for these days) So we have two jurisdictions who want a piece of me.  The Sherrifs were the cool ones trying to explain this was just an accident and tried to pursuade the FAA to let me go.  Apparently, this type of diplomacy is also common.  The Sheriff ran my license to show I wasn't wanted, but found my license was suspended (which it was)  This didn't go over well  with the FAA.  To make a long story short, The FAA issued me a summons charging me with felony tresspassing on federal property. (min 10,000 fine, 1 yr in jail).  The Sheriff issued me a ticket for the suspendeded license and told me not to drive my car and have somebody pick me up, which was arranged by an another courier.  When I arrived at court, (not traffic court mind you, this was a felony) my name was called and I stood up, watched the DA shaking his head as he read through my file, whispered something to the judge, the judge then stated, "at this time, we are not going to take any actions against you, you are free to go."  Basically, the DA was pissed off that this stupid case ever made it into the courtroom.  Oh, I forgot to tell you this happened in 1993 way before 9/11 security issues.

The traffic court case was a bit different. I said heck, if the fine is 300 or less I'll just plead guilty and get the F... out of there.  However, the video we all watched stated I was facing a 1,350.00 fine.  The judge came in after the video, spewed out his normal spew, but added something to the effect "hey, if your guilty, plead guilty, I am sick of tired of hearing your excuses, you either did it or you didn't!"  Not a pleasant man.  I was the first called (always am, alphabetically) and the judge said how do you plea?  I said not guilty.  He yelled out didn't you just hear what I said!  I said yes judge, I would still like to enter my plea of not guilty.  He shrugged and then stated "I guess you want a public defender too?"  I said yes please.  He sent me off to setup another court date.

When I got to court, all the people who plead not guilty are put in a room with like 4 attorneys to handle all of us, about 50.  Again, this was done alphbetically so I did not have to wait.  My PD said you are free to go, there was no probable cause. 

I said see ya and ran out the door, hell, I had deliveries to make.

Question is why was there no probable cause?  Did the Sheriff have no reason to check my driving status because I wasn't driving at the time, or did the felony case that was basically dropped preclude any other action against me?  What do you all think?  I still don't know the real answer. 

Mike
 

 

[swifty]

43 views and no one can venture a guess?
You people are smart!  Somebody knows the answer I'm sure of it.

[ruskiegirl]

43 views and no one can venture a guess?
You people are smart!  Somebody knows the answer I'm sure of it.

It's probably a matter of desire rather than ability.

[runnin_skeerd]

Depending on the jurisdiction (state) of the offense, driving while suspended is most likely a moving offense and therefore a misdemeanor depending on the number of subsequent offenses.  In order for the deputy to establish probable cause that the offense of driving while suspended was committed within his/her jurisdiction, he/she would have to actually see you in physical control of the motor vehicle. 

In order for a law enforcement officer to arrest or cite based on the commission of a misdemeanor offense, the officer must actually see the offense committed; however, with felonies, the officer must only establish probable cause that a felony was committed and the person arrested committed the offense.

In all likelihood, the case against you was dismissed because the deputy either did not see you commit the offense and this fact was established prior to bringing the case to trial or the deputy failed to establish the probable cause in the charging instrument.  A farfetched possiblity is that the deputy had no reason to establish contact with you in the first place; therefore, any charges stemming from the contact becomes "Fruit of the Poisonous Tree".

Good thing this happened prior to Sept. 11, 2001 or you might be posting your message from some federal penitentiary.

[swifty]

Depending on the jurisdiction (state) of the offense, driving while suspended is most likely a moving offense and therefore a misdemeanor depending on the number of subsequent offenses.  In order for the deputy to establish probable cause that the offense of driving while suspended was committed within his/her jurisdiction, he/she would have to actually see you in physical control of the motor vehicle. 

In order for a law enforcement officer to arrest or cite based on the commission of a misdemeanor offense, the officer must actually see the offense committed; however, with felonies, the officer must only establish probable cause that a felony was committed and the person arrested committed the offense.

In all likelihood, the case against you was dismissed because the deputy either did not see you commit the offense and this fact was established prior to bringing the case to trial or the deputy failed to establish the probable cause in the charging instrument.  A farfetched possiblity is that the deputy had no reason to establish contact with you in the first place; therefore, any charges stemming from the contact becomes "Fruit of the Poisonous Tree".

Good thing this happened prior to Sept. 11, 2001 or you might be posting your message from some federal penitentiary.

Definitely would have been different post 9/11.  What happened was, and this is just a
guess, is that the Sheriff was actually on my side, trying to get the FAA morons to release me into their custody.  Since the FFA agents have absolutely nothing to do except wait for a once in a year chance like my problem, they were reluctant to do so.  In any event, they eventually did, and even one of the Sheriffs tried to talk his partner (another sheriff) out of writing the ticket for the suspended license.  I sense he knew what you are eluding to.  They never saw me driving the car.  Thanks for the explanation.