Question for any Ohio leo ...

Hey guys (gals),

I'm having a debate with my soon to be 18 year old daughter. Recently Ohio passed a bill changing some of the laws related to under 18 drivers. House Bill 0343 I believe is the correct cite. The hours that a minor may operate a motor vehicle and the number of passengers was changed to a bit more restriction. Fine with me as I would prefer my child and other teens to not be out and about at all hours.
My question to anybody who might care to comment, must an officer have pc other than the number of passengers in a vehicle to affect a traffic stop? Say my daughter had a car load of other kids out at 11 on a Saturday night would that alone be pc to make a stop? I know that the Ohio legeslature recently changed the law making a stop based on seat belt allowable, and my contention is that the number of passengers beyond the allowable would also constitute pc for a traffic stop. She (of course) claims otherwise since all almost 18 year olds know all!
The passenger law doesn't apply to her, only under 17, but I claim that no officer can judge a few months of age in passing, would see a vehicle full of kids which is a violation and would make a stop based on that. She got downright mad at that and said something to the effect of violation of her 4th amendment rights (kids and their government classes) and said that would not be allowed. I said that the application of her 4th would not apply since the officer made his stop based in law, and that any stop that has pc is allowed, if for nothing more that investigational purposes only. If no violation was found that they would be on their way.
Any comments? Am I correct in my basis of my argument? Informed opinion only please, not other youngsters who feel threatened by the man!

Thanks, Dave

If the car is in her name, would her age show up when it's ran?

Vehicle is registered in my name, so the age of the operator would not be readily apparent. That is my basis for my opinion, that in order to verify the age of the operator a vehicle stop would be performed and her ID checked/ran.

Comments?

Thanks, Dave

I'm not a leo, but I'd have to say he can't pull them over its not PC. However, you can't drive 100 yards without a LEO having probable cause for something.


Even if i'm wrong, the 2nd statement is true, so she would not be safe if the LEO was suspicious.

There are no Ohio LEO's verified and on the list, so it'll be difficult to get a LEO answer on the Ohio law.

Having said that. If there is suspicion of a crime, that IS probable cause. A youthful looking driver with more than one passenger would be cause.

Also, had the "Seatbelt as a primary stop" discussion with my girls. And found that any law is grounds for a stop, unless specificly stated otherwise in the code. So there was language in the seatbelt law that said it could only be ticketed as a secondary offense. That language was removed. That is how it is now possible to do a stop for a seatbelt.

There is no such language in the code regarding the number of passengers, aznd curfew. Hence they can be used as the reason for a stop and as probable cause.

You can try www.columbusracing.com (mods go ahead and remove the link if you don't want other forums linked) we have a couple LEOs on there. I was actually wondering the same thing about the new law.

Thanks for the comments Yellow2003. This only confirms what I said in this discussion with my daughter. I told her to be careful and don't do anything to raise the likelyhood of being stopped for this. She wanted to argue, of course, but I think she listened.
I will check out the columbusracing.com site and see if anybody there is an Ohio LEO to pose the question to.

Thanks again, Dave

I don't live too far from you o4 Cobra Nut. I live in Amelia.

I am a LEO in Ohio. Your daughter is correct. As of this point with the House 343 recently going into effect, it is not PC for the stop. The same is also true for seatbelt as it is still a secondary violation. Any more questions let me know.

TG84Moss said:

I am a LEO in Ohio. Your daughter is correct. As of this point with the House 343 recently going into effect, it is not PC for the stop. The same is also true for seatbelt as it is still a secondary violation. Any more questions let me know.

Click to expand...

Some issues.....
1st: there was a major media campaign a year ago that stated the seat belt law had become a "Primary Offense" and reason for a stop.

2nd: I did quite a bit of research with the local PD, and we broke out the books. My previous post was accurate. The new law would have to state explicitly that it was not a 'primary offense' and as such not PC for a stop.

3rd: If your department does not enforce a seat belt violation as a primary violation and reason for a stop then that would be the exception rather than the rule.

Based on these issues, and the fact that you are not registered in the list as a LEO, I question your statement that you are. If you in fact are, my appologires.

If you are not.... Do NOT post inaccurate information under the impression of authority.
There are those who depend on the information in this forum to be as accurate as possible.

I am in the process of being verified as I post this. Mods remove it if you choose.

-Per the Ohio Revised Code section 4513.263 most current version from codes.ohio.gov:

(B) No person shall do any of the following:

(1) Operate an automobile on any street or highway unless that person is wearing all of the available elements of a properly adjusted occupant restraining device, or operate a school bus that has an occupant restraining device installed for use in its operator’s seat unless that person is wearing all of the available elements of the device, as properly adjusted;

D) Notwithstanding any provision of law to the contrary, no law enforcement officer shall cause an operator of an automobile being operated on any street or highway to stop the automobile for the sole purpose of determining whether a violation of division (B) of this section has been or is being committed or for the sole purpose of issuing a ticket, citation, or summons for a violation of that nature or causing the arrest of or commencing a prosecution of a person for a violation of that nature, and no law enforcement officer shall view the interior or visually inspect any automobile being operated on any street or highway for the sole purpose of determining whether a violation of that nature has been or is being committed.



-From House Bill 343 (quoted from http://www.legislature.state.oh.us/bills.cfm?ID=126_HB_343)

(F)(1) No holder of a permit issued under division (A) of this section shall operate a motor vehicle upon a highway or any public or private property used by the public for purposes of vehicular travel or parking in violation of the conditions established under division (A) of this section.

(2) Except as provided in division (F)(2) of this section, no holder of a permit that is issued under division (A) of this section and that is issued on or after July 1, 1998, and who has not attained the age of seventeen eighteen years, shall operate a motor vehicle upon a highway or any public or private property used by the public for purposes of vehicular travel or parking between the hours of one a.m. midnight and five six a.m.

The holder of a permit issued under division (A) of this section on or after July 1, 1998, who has not attained the age of seventeen eighteen years, may operate a motor vehicle upon a highway or any public or private property used by the public for purposes of vehicular travel or parking between the hours of one a.m. midnight and five six a.m. if, at the time of such operation, the holder is accompanied by the holder's parent, guardian, or custodian, and the parent, guardian, or custodian holds a current valid driver's or commercial driver's license issued by this state, is actually occupying a seat beside the permit holder, and does not have a prohibited concentration of alcohol in the whole blood, blood serum or plasma, breath, or urine as provided in division (A) of section 4511.19 of the Revised Code.



(2) Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, no law enforcement officer shall cause the operator of a motor vehicle being operated on any street or highway to stop the motor vehicle for the sole purpose of determining whether a violation of division (F)(2) of this section has been or is being committed or for the sole purpose of issuing a ticket, citation, or summons for such a violation or for causing the arrest of or commencing a prosecution of a person for such violation.

The section for more than one person in the car other than a parent is 4507.07 (B) (4) and section (H) includes the wording making the violation not PC for a stop but that would make the post even more excessive if I added that as well.

You are verified.

TG84Moss said:

I am in the process of being verified as I post this. Mods remove it if you choose.

Click to expand...

My appologies. I was 100% wrong.

I should have looked at the code myself.

No problem Yellow :beer:

As I said before, let me know if you or the original poster have any more questions.

Thanks Yellow and TG for your responses. I'll still tell my daughter to not do anything to raise suspicion and she'll be ok. The occupant number and seat belt might still not be primary on a stop, but speed or reckless will!

Thanks Again

:beer: Dave