Even though a police office must have a lawful reason to stop you, “lawful reason” has been interpreted very broadly, allowing law enforcement officers to stop for pretty much any reason they want.
Technically? No. Practically? Pretty much.
For a police officer to stop your vehicle, he or she must have a reasonable articulable suspicion that criminal activity is afoot. Absent such reasonable articulable suspicion (an impression of the truth of the situation that can be expressed), the officer must not stop your car. If he or she does, it is an unlawful stop. The courts will suppress any evidence of a crime that the police officer finds after that as “fruit of the poisonous tree.”
So that sounds pretty fair and just. The officer must have a lawful reason to stop you. Without that reason, he will not be able to use any evidence he collects because the stop is illegal. In practice, the legislature and courts have written and interpreted the laws allowing seizure of motor vehicles very broadly. Only the most incompetent officers have a hard time finding a lawful reason to stop your car.
Pretextual Stops
Bear in mind, the reason that police give for stopping you may not be the real reason. This farce is known as a “pretextual stop.” For example, you are driving your car at 2 a.m., and the officer wants to see if you have been drinking. The cop can find an unrelated reason to pull you over (e.g., taillight out) just so they can stop you to see if you’ve been drinking. It is well-settled law that pretextual stops are perfectly legal. The officer doesn’t even have to charge you with the pretextual reason for the stop, and very often they do not.
Traffic Laws
Here are some examples of traffic laws that are frequently used by police officers in pre-textual stops.
Idaho Code 49-808 (Turning Movements and Required Signals)
The Statute
This statute deals with turn signals. The statute mandates, “On controlled-access highways and before turning from a parked position, the signal shall be given continuously for not less than five (5) seconds and, in all other instances, for not less than the last one hundred (100) feet traveled by the vehicle before turning.”
5-second rule on controlled-access highways
Courts have interpreted the law to mean that on highways that have exits and on-ramps (freeways and interstates), you must leave your turn signal on for at least five seconds before starting to turn.
5-second rule from parking
This law also applies if you turn from a parked position, such as turning out from being parallel parked on the side of the street. If you only signal for 4 seconds before moving, you violate the law, and the police officer can stop your vehicle.
5-seconds is longer than you think
Go to your smartphone’s stopwatch and watch five seconds pass. Now imagine waiting that long before changing lanes on the freeway. You will quickly see that if a cop wanted to stop you, all they would have to do is follow you long enough to see you make this mistake. In fact, sometimes it’s not even a mistake. It’s a necessary maneuver when traffic is changing quickly.
100-foot rule on all other roads
Next, the statute requires that you signal for 100 feet before turning on all other roadways. Now the fact of the matter is, in many instances – especially in the city – this is next to impossible. If you are traveling in slow-moving traffic in downtown Boise, it is impossible to wait until you have traveled 100 feet with your turn signal on before changing lanes or turning. Again, a police officer who wants to stop you only needs to follow you for a few minutes before you will be forced to make this maneuver. Then the cop will have a lawful basis to stop you.
Idaho Code 49-644 (Required Position and Method of Turning)
You are probably turning wrong
This statute deals with how you should turn your car. This law is a favorite of police officers. Violation of it is also a common way to drive, and most people do not realize it is illegal. Again, it is also sometimes necessary if you have an immediate second turn you need to make.
Turning Left
Most drivers know that when you turn left, you need to turn into the closest lane of travel. Otherwise, you may run into a vehicle coming in the opposite direction that is lawfully turning right.
Turning Right
What drivers don’t realize is that you must do the same when turning right. The code requires, “Both the approach for a right turn and the right turn shall be made as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway.”
Courts have interpreted this to mean you must remain in the closest lane to the curb. If you take a right turn and swing into the lane farther from the curb, you violate this statute. This mistake gives a police officer a lawful reason to pull you over.
Idaho Code 49-637 (Driving on Highways Laned for Traffic)
This law is a very frequently used statute for stopping vehicles, especially if you are out past 2 AM.
The Statute
The statute requires you to “drive as nearly as practicable entirely within a single lane and shall not be moved from that lane until the driver has first ascertained that the movement can be made with safety.”
Hard law to follow
Follow any car, on any road, day or night, and count how many times it touches one of the lines marking the lanes of travel. Each time a car touches one of those lines marking the lanes of travel, they violate 49-637. A cop now has the pretext they need to stop you.
Harder to follow the officer behind you
It doesn’t take very long to make this mistake when a police officer is following your vehicle. Actually, it’s even more likely to happen when a cop is tailing you because you are nervously watching them in your rearview mirror. You are bound to let your vehicle drift just enough to touch or cross these lines. The police officer then has the reasonable articulable suspicion they need to stop your car.
Equipment Violations
Equipment violations are one of the most frequently used reasons a cop stops a vehicle. They like these because they are easy to spot, and they are objective. Credibility really isn’t an issue because the police officer can easily document an equipment violation.
The following remaining examples are equipment violations.
Idaho Code 49-949 (Requirement as to Fender or Covers Over All Wheels on Motor Vehicles)
This code deals with fenders and mud flaps. It’s a complicated statute, but it essentially says that a truck has to have mud flaps if the fender is 10 inches above the roadway when the truck is unloaded. The courts have interpreted the word trucks to include “pickup trucks.” Consequently, even if you have a stock pickup truck with no lift, if the fender is more than 10 inches off the road, you need to have a mud flap that makes up the difference. Telling the cop (and/or the courts) that you purchased the pickup truck that way from the manufacturer is not a defense.
Also, this code requires fender flares if you put on aftermarket tires and wheels that extend out past the fender. If the tires extend out past the fender, then a police officer can stop you for violating 49-949.
If a cop wants to stop you and sees a violation of this statute, he will have a lawful basis.
Idaho Code 49-944 (Standards for Windshields and Windows of Motor Vehicles)
This law covers the tinting of car windows and windshields. It is a complicated statute, with many different technical requirements. You may want to read it if you have tinting on your windows to make sure you are within regulations. The police will use this as an excuse to stop you.
Idaho Code 49-937 (Mufflers, Prevention of Noise)
Another low-hanging fruit for the police to grab is a noisy muffler. The reason that this is a violation the police will often use is because it is hard to quantify how loud your muffler is. Accusing you of having a loud muffler is a perfect infraction for a cop to use to pull you over, because you will have difficulty disproving them.
Idaho Code 49-902 (Vehicle Equipment)
This code has made it unlawful to operate a motor vehicle that has equipment that is in an “unsafe condition.” The Idaho Court of Appeals held that a cracked windshield is a condition that makes the vehicle unsafe to drive. (See State v. Kinser, 112 P.3d 845, 141 Idaho 557 [Idaho App. 2005].) Even when the crack is on the passenger side of the vehicle, it is considered unsafe. If a police officer sees a cracked windshield, they can stop your vehicle, and it will be a lawful stop.
A cop can use this statute in other scenarios as well, such as with busted tail lights and burned-out headlights.
Next time you hear someone say that the Fourth Amendment protects American citizens from unreasonable seizures (including traffic detentions), remember that the Idaho legislature and Idaho appellate courts have ensured that almost any stop officers make will be deemed reasonable.
Common related questions
Here are a few other frequently asked questions related to your rights when you are stopped by the police.
Can you refuse a pat-down from police?
Yes, in many cases. If there is no warrant, a search is considered unreasonable when a cop pulls you over, unless there is an exception. While you may feel you are getting frisked for no reason, a common exception is that a police officer can legally give you a pat-down if they suspect a weapon. If no weapon is suspected, you do not have to consent to being frisked, and you never have to agree to a warrantless vehicle search. You do not have the right to physically resist. Consenting to a search can affect your court case, if applicable.
Can police confiscate your phone?
If a cop stops you, arrests you, and seizes your cell phone, they need a warrant in order to search it. This privacy right comes from a US Supreme Court decision, 13-132 Riley v. California (06/25/2014).
Do I have to tell an officer if I have a gun?
You do not need a state permit to buy or possess (concealed or otherwise) a handgun, shotgun, or rifle in Idaho. Unlike some states, you do not have to inform a police officer that you are carrying a weapon immediately. You do need to tell them if they ask if you have a gun, though.
Can cops pull you over for driving late at night?
The police cannot pull you over for no other reason than that you are driving at night. It does not satisfy the requirements of an articulable reasonable suspicion that you are doing or have done something illegal. Instead of simply pulling you over because it is late at night or you are leaving the vicinity of a bar, the cop must have some other reason — as discussed in the “Pretextual Stops” section above.
Can you sue police for illegal detainment?
Yes. Police detention can be lawful or unlawful. Unlawful detention violates civil rights guaranteed in the Fourth Amendment. The cop must have a reasonable articulable suspicion you have committed a crime to hold you against your will. They cannot do so for no reason.
A traffic stop is a form of lawful detention, as long as the officer has a reasonable article suspicion that you committed a crime. Plus, when they pull you over, the stop must be no longer than it takes to resolve the infraction for which they stopped you. The stop can be lawfully extended by evidence they see of another crime, but assessment of that potential crime must also be assessed relatively quickly. After reasonably short analysis they can either arrest you – if they have reasonable cause – or let you go.