(1)Officer sees one backseat passenger pass bag of marijuana to another passenger who tries to hide it under the seat. Car searched incident to arrest and driver arrested for CS under front seat. Defense motion to suppress can't fly on these facts, right?
(2)Car playing loud music. Officer warns driver - asks driver's name, then gets written consent to search. Driver's wallet found in car reveals failure to ID-fugitive and DWLI. More than a mere 'encounter' prior to the consent?

[This message was edited by Waco on 02-19-08 at .]

My (not very experienced) first guesses:

1. Assuming the car was lawfully stopped and the officer was viewing from a lawful vantage point, then "the totality of the circumstances" should determine whether the officers had PC. The defense might ask "How did the cop know it was contraband?", but hiding the package makes it suspicious. On another take, if the driver never touched the stuff, and the police saw this, the driver's attorney might argue that he never had possession (i.e. "He didn't know the passenger was carrying. The police saw the drugs passed between passengers, my guy had no knowledge nor control..."). Then you get into proving possession by proximity and circumstances.... But generally I think the prosecution will usually carry the day on these types of circumstances.

2. The defense argument: Since the consent to search was voluntary, and the subject could halt the search at any instant, the subject was free to go and therefore was not "detained." Thus, there is no violation of sec. 38.02 A person must be " under arrest or detained" before they can be charged with failure to ID. A person can lie through their teeth during a consensual encounter and it is not a penal code violation.

After the officer found the 'real' ID, and probably had grounds to detain subject for further investigation, did the subject continue to maintian the false ID? Then they probably put themselves into the soup.

Waco, on #2, was there some sort of local ordinance on loud music that the officer was enforcing? If he just randomly walked by and said "hey, turn down the music," I wouldn't classify that as a detention.

Why would a local ordinance against loud music be required for the stop?

Car playing loud music, officer stops vehicle & advises reason for the stop. While writing citation, officer observes shaking/nervousness & asks for consent to search. Consent is signed (scribbled) but not dated or filled out completely.

Consent Valid?

DL found in search showed license invalid & that driver lied about his name. Even if consent not valid, wouldn't driver have been required to show his license, resulting in DWLI & Failure to ID?