Consent to a violation of your constitutional rights

The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees the right of individuals to be free from illegal searches and seizures. A search is presumed unconstitutional unless conducted pursuant to an order issued for probable cause that specifically describes what is sought and where it will be found. Not surprisingly, there are numerous exceptions to the court order requirement.

One of the most important exceptions, if not the most important, is consent. If a person consents to a search, that person has waived the Fourth Amendment protections guaranteed by the United States Constitution. The problem is that most people believe that they have no right to say no. If a police officer orders you to get out of your car in order to search it, you must obey the officer. If you end up getting arrested and there is a problem with the record, let your attorney handle it.

It’s a very different story when the officer asks for your permission to search. Often times, the officer will ask someone if the person has something illegal inside the car. If the person says no, the officer then says “Would you mind if I record it?” You have a constitutional right to tell that police officer no. If there is no legally valid reason to search your car, house or person, the police officer is prohibited from conducting a search without your consent.

There are numerous reasons why you should never consent to a search. From a moral perspective, some feel that it is an insult to the men who fought and died for their 4th Amendment in the American Revolution to simply give it away because they feel they have nothing to hide. The author is among those who have that line of thought. Yet why would you let the police go on a fishing expedition through your car, pockets, or home? If the officer finds a seed that you subjectively believe to be a marijuana seed, you have just created a big problem for yourself that will only be solved after spending money on a lawyer and your mugshot is posted online with the legend “possession of marijuana “. under your name. This problem could have been avoided with a simple “no”.

Using logic, the police will only ask for your consent to search when they suspect you will find something, but have no reason yet to conduct a search without a warrant. If you decide that you give them permission to search and the police locate something, it will absolutely devastate any Fourth Amendment defense you have for a search, as the basis of the search is not “hunch” but “consent.”

Some people also believe that allowing the search will allow them to assert ignorance when something is located. The line of thought is “Why would you consent to a search if you knew something was present?” Not only has that individual waived his right to object under the Fourth Amendment, he has also created an argument that hardly any jury will ever believe. To be very clear, no one will ever believe that you did not know you had crack in your pocket. No one will ever believe you didn’t know about the eight ball of cocaine and the gun under the driver’s seat in your own personal car. Contrary to what people may have heard and / or believe, the contraband does not have to be physically on your person to be arrested. Close physical proximity is usually sufficient for an arrest.

To avoid all of these problems, if the police officer orders you to submit to a search, obey the officer. If the police officer asks you to submit to a search, always say no. If you are not sure you have a choice, you can always say something like “in case you are asking me to consent to a search, the answer is no, I will not consent. Follow your command.”