POLICE MUST FOLLOW THE LAW

The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta was dead on the mark in
its ruling last week that a deputy sheriff in South Georgia acted illegally
when he detained and searched a motorist's car after a traffic stop and
found illegal drugs.

The three-judge panel unanimously ruled that the deputy violated Jody James
Boyce's Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable search and seizure
when he detained Boyce's car until a a drug-sniffing dog could be brought
to the scene. This was after Brody refused the officer's request to permit
a search of his car.

Boyce, who pleaded guilty last July to a charge of possession with intent
to distribute drugs and was sentenced to 12 years in prison, had entered
the plea conditionally while maintaining the search was illegal. While he
could be retried, prosecutors cannot present the drugs as evidence, which
essentially leaves them with no case to prosecute.

That police must adhere to the rules of law far outweighs the fact that a
person who possessed illegal drugs will go free. In this instance, the
judges concluded that Deputy David Edwards, who pulled Boyce over on
Interstate 95 after he observed him driving under the speed limit and
weaving, had no legitimate reason to justify an involuntary search of the
Boyce's car. Boyce explained that he had been driving 13 hours and was
tired, and a check of his driver's license did not indicate that he was
wanted by any police authorities. There were no drugs in view.

The judges' panel concluded the only reason Edwards detained Boyce's car
was that Boyce refused to permit a voluntary search of his vehicle.

This is any citizen's right. Absent real evidence that a motorist may be
carrying contraband drugs, a police officer cannot legally hold a vehicle
or prolong detention to permit a search simply because the motorist doesn't
voluntarily agree to a search.

Yes, it is unfortunate that a dealer in illegal drugs will go free. But
when it becomes a question of which is more important, our rights under the
Constitution or allowing an officer to break the rules, the answer is a
no-brainer.