SWCPHX

Okay, but I just told you that NCIC is a nationwide system. So if I'm a Michael Jackson with the same DOB in NY and the officer has a Michael Jackson in AZ with the same DOB that he runs NCIC, in your logic, how is that not a search against me also?

Boggie Dog

So a search for Michael Jackson with a dob of 7/4/1776 would return every MJ with that dob in the entire country?

Has to be something in it to whittle down the results. IF this is how it works then yes you are searching every MJ.

Good Guy

DL, SSN, home address, etc., etc. All can be used to whittle the results down. I was almost denied a job because they said I had an active warrant out of Texas.

Now, back to the RS topic. RS is what a reasonable "officer" believes to be suspicious. Notice I say a reasonable "officer, not a reasonable "person". What an officer deems to be suspicious is based on each officers training and experience. So, RS can vary from situation to situation and officer to officer. I know you want a definitive answer to your question, but, like I said up thread, there is no black and white answer.

Boggie Dog

This is the definition I keep running across. Is it accurate?

Good Guy

That is the key phrase. I have to be able to articulate why I thought your behavior, or the situation was suspicious. Again, this is based on my experience and training. Every situation is different. That is why I love my job. Never a routine.

Boggie Dog

Not just suspicion but suspicious that the person has been, is, or is about to be involved in a criminal act.

Two very different things.

Firebug4

It is a search of a database it is not a search of a person. If the officer already has a person's information, the person doesn't even have to know that he or she is being run. The only thing that the officer has to be concerned with is that the NCIC check is being done for an official purpose in the performance of his official duties. For instance, I couldn't run my daughters boyfriend just to check him.

FB

Firebug4

Yes, it would return every MJ with that DOB in the entire country. Their are things to whittle down the results. However, you can only do that after the results come back. Generally, this is accomplished with biographically information (height, weight, prior addresses, soc #) Many times this is why the Law Enforcement officer be it a traditional LEO, CBP, or Border Patrol officer is asking those questions that are many times objected to. He is filtering the information to determined if you are the MJ with that DOB that the warrant came back to.

FB

Ari

A lot of misinformation in this thread and the issues are being confused.

1. Simply running a person through NCIC without more is not a 'search' or 'seizure' within the meaning of the 4th Amendment and therefore does not require RS.
2. Detainng a person for the purpose of running that person through NCIC does require RS as the detention is a 'seizure' within the meaning of the 4th Amendment. The fact that a cop wants to run someone through NCIC does not, on its own, constitute RS to detain that person; rather, the standard RS requirement applies.
3. Compelling a person to produce an ID is a 'search' within the meaning of the 4th Amendment and therefore requires RS. The fact that a cop wants to run someone through NCIC does not, on its own, constitute RS to compel that person to present an ID or ID oneself; rather, the standard RS requirement applies

So wanting to run a person through NCIC does not create RS to detain that person or compel that person to ID herself, but the act of running someone through NCIC does not require RS. A cop being called to a scene, without more, does not constitute RS. Therefore, a cop walking up to a situation cannot just detain everyone and compel everyone to ID themselves for the purpose of running them through NCIC-- RS for each person is required. However, if that same cop knows the identity of a party or the parties and runs them through NCIC without compeling them to ID themselves and without detaining them, no RS is required. It is really quite simple, actually.

Ari

No, it isn't. (And "afoot" is one word in this case).

If you want to detain that person or compel that person to ID himself, RS is required. Simply "encounter[ing]" someone is not RS for that. At the same time, running that person through NCIC whithout detention or compelling the person to ID himself (like if you know the name of the person or a person 'voluntarily' presents ID) does not require RS.

See my post above for explanation.

Boggie Dog

Thanks for the last two post Ari. Your explanations helped me to better understand.

I find it odd that our LEO types couldn't articulate those things.

Wally Bird

Not odd at all. Those sorts of legal distinctions only come into it later; when the PD or DA decides not to proceed with charges or the case reaches a court of law.

Most cops don't even think of, much less worry about, such niceties in the field since they know full well that the subject is either equally ignorant of the requirement and/or will be sufficiently cowed not to make a fuss about it.

Theory and practice, theory and practice.
Is it too late to bring the two back into line ? Yes, long since.

Bearcat06

It's running Professor.....



Funny....I (along with my co-workers and fellow LOEs around the US) do it all the time....and have had no issues from the Courts......

Wally Bird

You won't if the subject turns out to have been involved in criminal activity. That's RAS ex post facto and the courts will invariably let it slide.

That's not what we are discussing (well I am at least). If you do an NCIC check on a completely innocent individual that's between you and your victim; it will never get anywhere near a court. A complaint against you or your PD will be dismissed out of hand.

You have free rein if you want to avail yourself of it, which apparently you do. Still not right but what ya gonna do ?

Ari

Called a typo-- a little different . . .

If the issue were squarely presented and you couldn't articulate RS, you would.

However, the issue is rarely squarely presented to a court-- here's why: If you search someone and it is a bad search, the fruits can be tossed out. If you compel a person to produce an ID without RS, that person has a warrant, and you arrest that person, it isn't a 'bad' arrest-- the arrest can't be 'tossed out'. Once you run someone through NCIC and a warrant comes back, barring a mistake on your part, you have PC to arrest that person. So, as far as the guilty are concerned, the issue really isn't going to come up.

As a practical matter, it would only come up in two instances: (1) you arrest someone for failure to ID, concealing identity, or some similar statute and you can't articulate RS, or (2) you detain an innocent person long enough for that person to decide to come around and sue you and you can't articulate RS. When you encounter one of these instances and do what you "do all the time", it will not come down on your side. The argument that 'I do it all the time and it hasn't been and issue' does not mean a practice is legal.