Stopped for Tint, He Wouldn't Say If He Was Armed — Then the Department Ruled the Search ILLEGAL

San Diego, 6:40 p.m., January 1, 2024. A driver stopped for window tint will not say if he has weapons, and the officer searches his car. Three body cameras recorded it, and the San Diego Police Department published them with its own internal affairs file. The investigator's report, approved April 18, 2024, sustains the search allegation: the officer "failed to articulate any specific articulable facts" that the man "was armed or concealing a weapon," and his actions were "not within Department Policy or legal parameters." The same file finds the discrimination, handcuff and courtesy allegations unfounded. So what does the law say about the question, the order out of the car, and the search of a car's inside? On screen and read aloud: Berkemer v. McCarty (the detainee "is not obliged to respond"), Pennsylvania v. Mimms, Michigan v. Long, and the department's own Procedure 4.01, set against the tape, then where each one stops. The officer's side is in the video too: a lawful stop, the reason given first, and why he says he searched. CHAPTERS 00:00 "Write me a ticket, bro." 00:22 Window tint, Imperial Avenue, 6:40 p.m. 01:15 The new law: the reason comes first 03:53 A red light, a radio call, "extremely nervous" 06:17 Two questions: Berkemer and Mimms 07:37 Out of the car, under the threat of arrest 10:12 The sergeant, the cuffs, 13 minutes 20 seconds 14:02 Michigan v. Long and the manual's list 15:09 What the officer told internal affairs 17:53 What the file does not say 18:48 Sign it, or see the magistrate 20:42 Act by act SOURCES — FOOTAGE Every recording in this video was published by the San Diego Police Department with its internal affairs file (IA #2024-0002), under California's SB 1421 / SB 16 disclosures: https://www.sandiego.gov/police/data-... — the investigator's report (every page shown): https://sdpdsb1421.sandiego.gov/Susta... 0:00 — The officer's body camera, file 1 of 2: https://sdpdsb1421.sandiego.gov/Susta... 0:47 — All three body cameras, the interview and the file — the department's disclosure page: https://www.sandiego.gov/police/data-... 1:03 — The acting sergeant's body camera: https://sdpdsb1421.sandiego.gov/Susta... 6:14 — The cover officer's body camera: https://sdpdsb1421.sandiego.gov/Susta... 15:17 — The officer's internal affairs interview (audio): https://sdpdsb1421.sandiego.gov/Susta... SOURCES — RECORD • San Diego Police Department, internal affairs file IA #2024-0002: the investigator's report approved April 18, 2024, and the interviews, on the department's disclosure page above. • Cal. Veh. Code § 2806.5, operative January 1, 2024: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/fa.... • Cal. Veh. Code § 40302(b): https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/fa.... • Cal. Penal Code § 148(g): https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/fa.... • Berkemer v. McCarty, 468 U.S. 420 (1984): https://supreme.justia.com/cases/fede... • Pennsylvania v. Mimms, 434 U.S. 106 (1977): https://supreme.justia.com/cases/fede... • Michigan v. Long, 463 U.S. 1032 (1983): https://supreme.justia.com/cases/fede... • SDPD Procedures 4.01 (rev. Aug. 27, 2021) and 6.01: https://www.sandiego.gov/police/data-... ⚠️ DISCLAIMER This video explains public records and published law. It is legal information, not legal advice. The department's findings are stated as the department wrote them. An internal affairs finding is not a court ruling, and nothing here says what a court would have decided. The officer is not named, and the driver is anonymous in the department's own file. Anyone facing a stop or a charge should talk to a lawyer licensed in their state. Every episode: one encounter, one statute or one holding, read out loud with the text on screen. Subscribe if that is the version you want. #Bodycam #TrafficStop #JohnNoven