JUDGES: COPS CAN'T SEARCH AUTO WITHOUT WARRANT

An 11th-hour decision handed down by the New Jersey Superior Court
appellant division last week will limit a police officer's ability to
search a suspect's vehicles after a motor vehicle stop.

The decision, made by a panel of three judges on Dec. 29, restricts the
power of police to conduct searches of a motor vehicle after the arrest of
one of the occupants in the car, said Robert Ramsey, a Hamilton lawyer,
Rutgers University School of Law professor and author of New Jersey Motor
Vehicle Law.

Ramsey said officers, under the terms of a 1981 New York ruling of State
vs. Belton, gave police the right to search a car in order to protect the
officer and recover evidence as an exception to the warrant requirement.

But last week's ruling opposes that privilege in the Garden State.

"This is a case that will have an enormous impact on law enforcement,"
Ramsey said.

The decision is based on a case where a Cape May County man, arrested on an
active warrant, was found in possession of drugs after he was already
handcuffed and sitting in the back seat of the officer's cruiser.

In 2002, William Eckel was caught driving in a car reported stolen by his
girlfriend's parents.

After his arrest, his girlfriend asked the officers if she could give him a
kiss and retrieve his clothes from the car.

When the officer decided to go get the clothes himself he found drug
paraphernalia like pot stems and blunt cigars in plain view inside the car,
records show.

According to the ruling, the officer found a "softball-sized Baggie" rolled
up inside a pair of denim shorts containing cocaine residue and drug
paraphernalia.

Eckel was charged with drug-related offenses and eventually pleaded guilty
to third-degree possession of cocaine with the intent to distribute.

His lawyer, Yvonne Segars, later issued a motion to suppress the evidence
on grounds the drugs were found illegally.

The opinion of the appellant division is Eckel was arrested on the active
warrant not on the drug charges and those drugs were obtained only after
the girlfriend said the suspect needed his clothes.

The opinion reads, "the search occurred after the arrest of the driver had
been completed by his physical restraint and actual removal to the patrol
car and, therefore, was not contemporaneous with the arrest of the driver."

Ramsey said the new ruling hamstrings the officer's ability to investigate
a suspect and find key evidence that could lead to further arrests -- like
drugs and weapons -- left inside the car.

To Ramsey, thousands of cases will be left unsolved without the power of
the Belton rule.

"There will be hundreds of thousands of searches that just won't take
place," Ramsey said.

"That's the key."

Now police officers will have to wait for a search warrant before entering
a suspect's vehicle.

The state's Attorney General's Office said there's a chance they'll appeal
the decision, but mostly all local agencies scoffed at the idea the ruling
really has any major impact on day-to-day arrests.

"We are still in the process of the reviewing the decision," John Haggerty,
a spokesperson with the state's Attorney General's Office said.

Lawrence Township Police Chief Daniel Posluszny said his office will follow
state guidelines no matter what.

He said the ruling has little effect on police activity because officials
still possess the power of the search warrant.

"We strive to work as a police department working within the law, so this
has no effect on our operations," Posluszny said. "It's not going to hamper
law enforcement in any manner."

Most local agencies yesterday said they'll wait to hear from Mercer County
Prosecutor Joe Bocchini before changing any guidelines.

"The appropriate direction will be given to (local police departments)
after we have the opportunity to thoroughly review and analyze the
opinion," Bocchini said.