Do I have the right for cops not to search my locked glove compartment?

Question

I'm going to be driving to high school, can I keep marijuana in my glove compartment locked?

They ocasionally bring dogs into the school and have them sniff out the lockers, I think they sniff the cars too. In the case they smell something suspicious on my car and they search it would they make me open my glove compartment.

I'm really nervous because I don't wanna get caught. Is it true that they can't open it?

And I live in MA.

Answer 1

Here's a genius idea.  Leave the pot at home! Problems...and worries solved.

If you know they already have dogs sniffing around, why risk it?  And yes, they CAN search your locked glove compartment.  You're on school grounds, and you are subject to search at any time...dogs or not.

Answer 2

If you HAVE to smoke at school, roll a hooter, stick it in your pocket and get rid of it early, before they start the searches.

As far as Broken--hmm.. let me think.. marijuana related deaths? Zero. Alcohol related deaths? Around 100,000 deaths per year, going strong for at least the last ten years.

The best advice I can give you is to stay away from situations where you will be searched and/or drug tested. Obviously you SHOULD not and CAN not stay away from school, so better be smart about it. I don't know what the laws are there but where I'm from it's an automatic felony if you have any kind of illegal substance within a certain distance of a school. And trust me, probation sucks.

EDIT: Gee, that's funny. Cause national statistics are what I was quoting as far as deaths from alcohol, and deaths from marijuana. Quote all you want about marijuana's subtle negative effects, and the effects on people with heart disease--who should be watching what they do anyways, and probably aren't drinking legal alcohol. My point is: Alcohol=legal, while it kills way more people than marijuana ever could (and again, if the drug council lists 0 deaths due to marijuana............), is more addictive, the effects are more degenerative, not to mention I've never seen anyone smoke a whole bag of weed and become the exact opposite of themselves.. but I have seen people drink an entire bottle of liquor and do that.. whatever, you have your beliefs, I have mine, we could quote statistics and **** all day, but that's not going to change either of our minds. So respect my opinion, and I'll respect yours. Bottom line: If cigarettes and alcohol are legal, weed should be right up there with them.

Answer 3

An alert by a trained law enforcement drug detection canine is probable cause to search the ENTIRE vehicle- including a locked glove compartment. The only real iffy area of this is whether this specific scenario would fall under Carroll or not. If it did then the officers could simply search without a warrant, but if it didn't they could simply secure the vehicle until they obtained a warrant.

See also-

Dog Sniff's and Probable Cause

http://www.patc.com/enewsletter/legal-an...

"In United States v. Place,i   the United States Supreme Court held that a canine sniff by a drug detection dog of the exterior of luggage in a public place, would not implicate the Fourth Amendment. If a drug detection dog were to alert on the luggage, officers would then have probable cause to believe that the luggage contained narcotics. This principle was followed with respect to motor vehicles as well."

U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Canine Sniffs of Vehicles

http://patc.com/weeklyarticles/canine-sn...

WARRANTLESS SEARCHES OF MOTOR VEHICLES

http://patc.com/weeklyarticles/warrentle...

"In November 2005 the Georgia Court of Appeals decided State v. Massa *xi, which follows the rationale of Lejeune. In Massa a deputy observed a car parked about 300 yards from a road on a dirt driveway in farming area that is becoming an industrial area. The deputy checked the registration and learned the vehicle was not stolen. The deputy observed through the window a baggy with a small amount of a green leafy substance which he recognized as suspected marijuana. The deputy then used an unlocking tool to open the vehicle and seize the suspected marijuana. Massa later returned to the vehicle from where he had been fishing and was subsequently charged. The trial court granted the motion to suppress and the State appealed. The Georgia Court of Appeals quoted Lejeune and said “…our Supreme Court (Georgia) has made clear that there is an automobile exception to the search warrant requirement, not an exemption.” Id. at 597. The Court held that the “automobile exception” did not apply in this case because the vehicle was unoccupied at the time the deputy discovered it and there was not indication that it was likely to be moved in the immediate future.

It is important to note that the decision in Massa is inconsistent with most of the cases discussed in this article as well as numerous Georgia cases. For example, in State v. Duncan *xii, the Georgia Court of Appeals held that a warrantless search was reasonable even though (as in the present case) the driver was arrested, handcuffed, and the keys secured, and there were no exigent circumstances. Additionally, while this decision does not make it clear whether the Court was specifically interpreting the 4th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, they do refer to Lejeune which was based upon an interpretation of the 4th Amendment."

EDIT:xmslolabellex-

You wrote-

"As far as Broken--hmm.. let me think.. marijuana related deaths? Zero. Alcohol related deaths? Around 100,000 deaths per year, going strong for at least the last ten years."

It may interest you to know that I've worked in Emergency Medical Services for 10yrs and have seen plenty of accidents, injuries, etc from cannabis use, as well as delt with plenty of people under it's influence. When you see "DUI Injuries/Deaths" those are not all from alcohol. Cannabis can and does kill, just like alcohol. The difference is alcohol is legal, cannabis is not.

You also said-

"norml.org - educate yourself fool"

As a practicing helthcare provider in Emergency Medicine for the last 10yrs, I think I have a little more "education" than you do from reading a website. Also I found much of the material on that site humorous. This one had me rolling on the floor laughing-

Pot’s Effects On Driving Performance Contrast Alcohol’s, Study Says

"Investigators at Hebrew University and the University of the Negev in Israel assessed the impact of alcohol and THC on simulated driving performance in fourteen subjects."

14 subjects is NOT even close to a viable study group. Then to tout it as evidence to justify the legalisation of cannabis shows that your site's authors don't understand how to read a study correctly or judge it's validity.

Nor is cannabus "harmless" like the site claims-

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

"Acute effects while under the influence include euphoria, increased appetite, anxiety, short-term memory loss, and circulation effects which may increase risks of heart attacks."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17712...

"The acute side effects caused by cannabis use are mainly related to psyche and cognition, and to circulation. Euphoria, anxiety, changes in sensory perception, impairment of memory and psychomotor performance are common effects after a dose is taken that exceeds an individually variable threshold. Cannabis consumption may increase heart rate and change blood pressure, which may have serious consequences in people with heart disease. Effects of chronic use may be induction of psychosis and development of dependency to the drug. Effects on cognitive abilities seem to be reversible after abstinence, except possibly in very heavy users. Cannabis exposure in utero may have negative consequences on brain development with subtle impairment of cognitive abilities in later life. Consequences of cannabis smoking may be similar to those of tobacco smoking and should be avoided. Use by young people has more detrimental effects than use by adults.'

EDTI #2: Statistics from where?

Some info that might interest you:

Impacts of cannabis on driving: An analysis of current evidence with an emphasis on Canadian data

http://www.tc.gc.ca/roadsafety/tp/tp1417...

"Many studies internationally have examined the prevalence of cannabinoids in drivers who have been injured or killed in motor vehicle collisions. These studies reveal that cannabinoids are the drugs most commonly found after alcohol in these individuals. Evidence from Canada is consistent with this observation; two recent studies detected cannabinoids in 13.9% and 19.5% of samples of seriously injured and fatally injured drivers, respectively."

http://druggeddriving.org/

http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/pubs/pressrel/p...

http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:sqO...

http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:1uB...

http://www.druglibrary.org/s******r/libr...

http://breathtest.wsp.wa.gov/SupportDocs...

Your information is faulty, there are confirmed cases of cannabis OD resulting in deaths.

http://www.drugwatch.org/CEDARS/MarDeath...

Marijuana Causes Many Deaths Reported as 'Accidents'

http://alcoholism.about.com/b/2003/11/02...

"Marijuana use is much more dangerous that believed and hundreds of young people die each year in "accidents" caused by their prolonged use of the drug, according to Britain's most senior coroner.

Hamish Turner, the president of the Coroners' Society, told The Telegraph that the marijuana, often portrayed as harmless, has increasingly been the cause of deaths that have been reported as accidents or suicides."

What you are hearing is the ressult of missrepresenting the facts. They say "Noone has died from using cannabis.", but what they don't tell you is that they mean directly, which is itself false. See your definition of dying from cannabis is person uses drug-> person dies from drug. My definition is person uses drug-> someone dies as a result. You may not consider it a cannabis caused death if someone under it's influence runs a red light and kills another driver, but I do, and so does the law. That's the difference between us- you have limited info, where as I have an education & years of first hand experience responding to events such as crashes caused by cannabis impaired drivers.

BTW- Giving me a thumbs down doesn't change the fact that my answer to the orriginal question was correct, it simply proves your level of immaturity.

- David

Answer 4

I'm not sure about laws in MA, as car search laws can be a tad confusing and vary by state.

I do know that here in california they can only search by peering in the windows and can't touch anything inside unless it is contraband in plain sight.  

Answer 5

Hahhaa yeah maybe back in 1980's but that has changed. now a peace officer can search a locked compartment

Answer 6

well, when you step or drive onto school property you automatically loose all rights. thats the case in any government building  

Answer 7

most schools do have a policies to search student vehicles. Most even have random searches and safety checks. Most of all, nothing a student brings to school or on school property has reasonable expectations of being private. If you don't want peolpe to see it, touch it, or hear it... then leave it home. But, as with probable cause in my state. If I am searching the car or locker and the dog finds evidence. It does give me just cause to search you, or get a warrant and if you refuse. We can and sometime do even attain warrant to search your home [depending on amount found]. We grew up with weed just like you, but we are parents as well... I answered your question, but there is more then just searching issues. For one part. They can NOT search your car without you or your parents present, but we can search the perimeter of the vehical. we'll flag if signs show [probable cause or just a safety issue or expired tag], Usually, we'll have the office pull you from class and we'll excort you to the car explaining that we have probable cause, we'll inform you what the dog marked (some states dont though, my state does). And they can not force you to unlock the glovebox. We can request for you to open it. But, it's best to comply for we can detain you and contact local authorities and have them do further search. Because by not opening it is even more probable cause and we can detain you at the jailhouse, and have the car towed to our impound (at your expense ofcourse).

So leaving it home after having it in the car is still going to have the dogs react and give us just cause for a search warrant. But if you don't have anything in the car it's just suspicion and you get released with a warning, you bring it to school you will be arrested.

Answer 8

Yes, the police can search your car including the glove box in this situation. It's called the carroll doctrine. (Carroll vs. US.) Because a car is mobile, the standard to search is lower, reasonable suspicion. When the dog alerts on your car the police have exceeded reasonable suspicion and now developed probable cause.

Answer 9

at my school, for us to park in the parking lot we had to sign papers saying that they can search are cars when they want. so i am guessing your school had u sign similar papers at some point so i am saying yes they can.

Answer 10

If a k-9 "hits" on your vehicle - that gives them permission to search.

Oh...and:

"I mean most cops probably go home and have a few beers or something everyonce in a while."

Yes, cops are over age 21 and having a beer at your home is perfectly legal.

Answer 11

If it's their policy and the dogs sniff something in your car, I'd say they have the probable cause to search it..........