在加拿大的constitutional right跟美国区别多么？

[geeti]

在美国如果有警察拦下你，要搜你车，可以直接口头拒绝：" I don't consent to any searches." 如果继续盘问，可以问“Are you detaining me, or am I free to go?" 这是基于4th amendment.

不熟悉加拿大的法律，请问可以这样么？

 

[月下独酌]

这是干啥呀，乖乖的让人家搜就行了

 

[geeti]

这是干啥呀，乖乖的让人家搜就行了

If the cop finds illegal drugs with your consent, you are screwed. It is not impossible when you're on a loaner's or rental car.

 

[月下独酌]

If the cop finds illegal drugs with your consent, you are screwed. It is not impossible when you're on a loaner's or rental car.

没那么点背吧，再说了。。。。放在车里也不是我的，没指纹

 

[路顺]

这个咱学习一下

 

[Ayin_Ottawa]

没那么点背吧，再说了。。。。放在车里也不是我的，没指纹

你在CFC贫嘴可以，你到美国法庭上试试看judge或者jury认不认同你的辩解。

据说警察也会栽赃陷害。。。

 

[月下独酌]

你在CFC贫嘴可以，你到美国法庭上试试看judge或者jury认不认同你的辩解。

据说警察也会栽赃陷害。。。

所以不能去美国

 

[Ayin_Ottawa]

在美国如果有警察拦下你，要搜你车，可以直接口头拒绝：" I don't consent to any searches." 如果继续盘问，可以问“Are you detaining me, or am I free to go?" 这是基于4th amendment.

不熟悉加拿大的法律，请问可以这样么？

你想当场被警察揍一顿，还是到美国监狱里住一晚？

 

[Ayin_Ottawa]

现场的警察就是大爷，别装聪明小吃罚单、蹲监狱，大到丧命。

Arrest
When a person is arrested and taken into police custody, they have been seized (e.g., a reasonable person who is handcuffed and placed in the back of a police car would not think they were free to leave). A person subjected to a routine traffic stop on the other hand, has been seized, but is not "arrested" because traffic stops are a relatively brief encounter and are more analogous to a Terry stop than to a formal arrest.[34] A police officer does not have the authority to arrest someone for refusing to identify himself when he is not suspected of committing a crime, unless state law says otherwise.[35] A search incidental to an arrest that is not permissible under state law does not violate the Fourth Amendment, if the arresting officer has probable cause.[36][37]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

 

[Ayin_Ottawa]

Court allows search and seizure in Va. case

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court affirmed Wednesday that police have the power to conduct searches and seize evidence, even when done during an arrest that turns out to have violated state law.
The unanimous decision comes in a case from Portsmouth, Va., where city detectives seized crack cocaine from a motorist after arresting him for a traffic ticket offense.

David Lee Moore was pulled over for driving on a suspended license. The violation is a minor crime in Virginia and calls for police to issue a court summons and let the driver go.

Instead, city detectives arrested Moore and prosecutors say that drugs taken from him in a subsequent search can be used against him as evidence.

"We reaffirm against a novel challenge what we have signaled for half a century," Justice Antonin Scalia wrote.

Scalia said that when officers have probable cause to believe a person has committed a crime in their presence, the Fourth Amendment permits them to make an arrest and to search the suspect in order to safeguard evidence and ensure their own safety.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/washington/judicial/2008-04-23-scotus-search_N.htm

 

[Beefburger]

记得不久前在market警察截住黑人小伙子开的车吗，该搜的都搜出来了，法官说了，不行，现在还要说警察的不是呢。

 

[geeti]

Probable cause是要有plain view.也就是警察看到或者其他非常绝对的因素，才能进行搜查。
而且现在闻到不算。USSC好像给过一个裁定。
宪法赋予你的权利如果自己都不珍惜，跟在国内就没啥区别了

Court allows search and seizure in Va. case

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court affirmed Wednesday that police have the power to conduct searches and seize evidence, even when done during an arrest that turns out to have violated state law.
The unanimous decision comes in a case from Portsmouth, Va., where city detectives seized crack cocaine from a motorist after arresting him for a traffic ticket offense.

David Lee Moore was pulled over for driving on a suspended license. The violation is a minor crime in Virginia and calls for police to issue a court summons and let the driver go.

Instead, city detectives arrested Moore and prosecutors say that drugs taken from him in a subsequent search can be used against him as evidence.

"We reaffirm against a novel challenge what we have signaled for half a century," Justice Antonin Scalia wrote.

Scalia said that when officers have probable cause to believe a person has committed a crime in their presence, the Fourth Amendment permits them to make an arrest and to search the suspect in order to safeguard evidence and ensure their own safety.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/washington/judicial/2008-04-23-scotus-search_N.htm

 

[Ayin_Ottawa]

Probable cause是要有plain view.也就是警察看到或者其他非常绝对的因素，才能进行搜查。
而且现在闻到不算。USSC好像给过一个裁定。
宪法赋予你的权利如果自己都不珍惜，跟在国内就没啥区别了

迄今为止，被停数次还没有被搜查过。

谈宪法太抽象，谈“现”法听现场警察的话没错。

 

[depon]

车都让警车叫停了，还谈啥宪法，来不及了。你可以不让警察搜，警察同样可以击毙你

 

[ccc]

Probable cause是要有plain view.也就是警察看到或者其他非常绝对的因素，才能进行搜查。
而且现在闻到不算。USSC好像给过一个裁定。
宪法赋予你的权利如果自己都不珍惜，跟在国内就没啥区别了

在美国被警察拦下，跟在国内没啥区别的话，那是求之不得的事情。