Warden search authority?

R

Raspack

New member
This past Saturday a friend and I were on a CA state run hunt for dove, rabbit and pig on one of the ecological preserves in the central valley. It was a special hunt that you had to apply for and be drawn to participate. During the hunt we noticed a CA fish and game warden patrolling the grounds and actually making contact with hunters. During the time we were there he stopped to talk to us while we sat on the side of the road taking a water break and cooling off. Both of us had the appropriate licenses, tags etc and out shotguns were unloaded, in gun socks and on the floor board behind the drivers seat of the truck. As the warden drove up and got out of his vehicle he said he would like to check licenses, any game we had taken and wanted to check guns. We both showed the requested paperwork and pulled the few dove from the ice chest. He then proceeded to open the back door of the truck and start pulling guns from the vehicle. He looked at each gun starting with mine. It was unloaded and he placed shells in the magazine and then went to the next gun. After finishing his inspection he stated the first gun he checked, mine, was capable of holding 3 shells in the magazine. He even said he had to force the shell and had to do it twice in order for it to fit. The gun has a wooden dowel as a plug and he said I won't cite you because you are "attempting to do the right thing", but also said, " I could cite if I wanted." His attitude toward the whole thing was that of I am the warden and you are just another [beeep] wipe hunter who is breaking the law. My question is, does he have the authority to open a closed vehicle and start pulling weapons out, that were NOT visible from the outside, and inspecting them?
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: RaspackHe then proceeded to open the back door of the truck and start pulling guns from the vehicle.

This is where the fur/fish cop and I would of had our first issue.
 
i have watched the show wild justice which is california fish and game people.

i have often wondered while watching that show if the constitution in california matters. it seems to me that they violate rights on a regular basis. starting with the fourth amendment.


opening a closed door to a truck would not be ok with me. i am not a lawyer or constitutional scholar, but sure seems to be an illegal search.
 
Originally Posted By: 6724i have watched the show wild justice which is california fish and game people.

i have often wondered while watching that show if the constitution in california matters. it seems to me that they violate rights on a regular basis. starting with the fourth amendment.


6724,
I have also seen a lot of questionable behavior on the show. You gotta remember it's a TV show and everybody's in on the production.
It took about one show for me to drop it to zero on my credibility scale.


Originally Posted By: 6724opening a closed door to a truck would not be ok with me. i am not a lawyer or constitutional scholar, but sure seems to be an illegal search.

Well,
It seems to me like it was a rude officer with absolutely no people skills, but it sounds like a legal search.
 
Originally Posted By: RaspackMy question is, does he have the authority to open a closed vehicle and start pulling weapons out, that were NOT visible from the outside, and inspecting them?

In my opinion, the answer is yes.
And here is the reason he did:

Originally Posted By: Raspack As the warden drove up and got out of his vehicle he said he would like to check licenses, any game we had taken and wanted to check guns. We both showed the requested paperwork and pulled the few dove from the ice chest. He then proceeded to open the back door of the truck and start pulling guns from the vehicle.

Your paperwork and doves were evidence you and your friend were hunting, so he had a legal right to check the guns used to take the doves.

In my opinion, he should have shown a little common courtesy and requested your consent first.
 
Originally Posted By: fw707Originally Posted By: RaspackMy question is, does he have the authority to open a closed vehicle and start pulling weapons out, that were NOT visible from the outside, and inspecting them?

In my opinion, the answer is yes.
And here is the reason he did:

Originally Posted By: Raspack As the warden drove up and got out of his vehicle he said he would like to check licenses, any game we had taken and wanted to check guns. We both showed the requested paperwork and pulled the few dove from the ice chest. He then proceeded to open the back door of the truck and start pulling guns from the vehicle.

Your paperwork and doves were evidence you and your friend were hunting, so he had a legal right to check the guns used to take the doves.

In my opinion, he should have shown a little common courtesy and requested your consent first.


Agree with the above. Also the weapons were in plain sight if looking in the vehicle from outside, so it was not an illegal search by any stretch of the imagination. Pretty rude of him, but he was within his powers. You sure he wasn't one of the "Full of myself" agents on the TV show?
whistle.gif
 
Originally Posted By: RadioOriginally Posted By: fw707Originally Posted By: RaspackMy question is, does he have the authority to open a closed vehicle and start pulling weapons out, that were NOT visible from the outside, and inspecting them?

In my opinion, the answer is yes.
And here is the reason he did:

Originally Posted By: Raspack As the warden drove up and got out of his vehicle he said he would like to check licenses, any game we had taken and wanted to check guns. We both showed the requested paperwork and pulled the few dove from the ice chest. He then proceeded to open the back door of the truck and start pulling guns from the vehicle.

Your paperwork and doves were evidence you and your friend were hunting, so he had a legal right to check the guns used to take the doves.

In my opinion, he should have shown a little common courtesy and requested your consent first.


Agree with the above. Also the weapons were in plain sight if looking in the vehicle from outside, so it was not an illegal search by any stretch of the imagination. Pretty rude of him, but he was within his powers. You sure he wasn't one of the "Full of myself" agents on the TV show?
whistle.gif


This is a state by state issue. That crap might fly in the communist republic of CA but not in MT. Checking licenses , animals, etc is fine but here atleast a Warden has no authority to check a vehicle without permission, a search warrant, or exigent circumstances that would have to be articulated well to constitute a lawful search.
 
Originally Posted By: bigsky_songdogsOriginally Posted By: RadioOriginally Posted By: fw707Originally Posted By: RaspackMy question is, does he have the authority to open a closed vehicle and start pulling weapons out, that were NOT visible from the outside, and inspecting them?

In my opinion, the answer is yes.
And here is the reason he did:

Originally Posted By: Raspack As the warden drove up and got out of his vehicle he said he would like to check licenses, any game we had taken and wanted to check guns. We both showed the requested paperwork and pulled the few dove from the ice chest. He then proceeded to open the back door of the truck and start pulling guns from the vehicle.

Your paperwork and doves were evidence you and your friend were hunting, so he had a legal right to check the guns used to take the doves.

In my opinion, he should have shown a little common courtesy and requested your consent first.


Agree with the above. Also the weapons were in plain sight if looking in the vehicle from outside, so it was not an illegal search by any stretch of the imagination. Pretty rude of him, but he was within his powers. You sure he wasn't one of the "Full of myself" agents on the TV show?
whistle.gif


This is a state by state issue. That crap might fly in the communist republic of CA but not in MT. Checking licenses , animals, etc is fine but here atleast a Warden has no authority to check a vehicle without permission, a search warrant, or exigent circumstances that would have to be articulated well to constitute a lawful search.

i would have to agree, in colorado your vehicle is considered an extension of your home. just because i have a fresh elk head in front of the house or in the garage, does not mean that the warden can walk freely into my house to check guns. like i said before, i am no attorney, BUT, i think any information/ evidence found in the truck without a warrant or consent would be thrown out by any objective judge.

but, i have seen personally law enforcement violate rights, mine. i was checking a rifle in at the airport once and there were some county cops hanging out, they came over to "inspect" my case, they wrote down the serial numbers off my rifles. pretty sure they have NO business in checking serial numbers without probable cause or consent. this was back many years before 9-11.

most of the law enforcement people that i have dealt with, both good and bad, know very little about the law and hope their "victim" does not either. when called on their behavior many have backed down.
 
Quote:a CA state run hunt for dove, rabbit and pig on one of the ecological preserves in the central valley. It was a special hunt that you had to apply for and be drawn to participate.
When you applied for permission take part in the said hunt, did you sign any paperwork as part of the application???

Since it was a State sponsored event on what sounds like a potential State controlled area, I'm betting there was some fine print, as well as a liability release, involved in the application forms that gave full authority for necessary inspections as deemed necessary by the agent...Maybe not worded exactly that way but similar...

A lot of applicants to similar events are so involved in the application being totally correct that they gloss over the fine print as to personal rights...
 
The officers had justification to inspect the firearms to make sure the birds they were shown were taken by lawful methods. In this case, the firearms in the vehicle could be searched for without a warrant. A motor vehicle is also mobile which creates an exigent circumstance to search without a warrant.

I believe the search was lawful, but the officers did a poor job in how they handled their hunter contact in the field.

In AZ for example, there is actually a state statute that enables wildlife officers to search without a warrant. This statute only applies to wildlife officers, not for all AZ state peace officers.

ARS 17-211(E3) states in part,
E. Game rangers and wildlife managers may, in addition to other duties:

1. Execute all warrants issued for a violation of this title.

2. Execute subpoenas issued in any matter arising under this title.

3. Search without warrant any aircraft, boat, vehicle, box, game bag or other package where there is sufficient cause to believe that wildlife or parts of wildlife are possessed in violation of law.

4. Inspect all wildlife taken or transported and seize all wildlife taken or possessed in violation of law, or showing evidence of illegal taking.

5. Seize as evidence devices used illegally in taking wildlife and hold them subject to the provisions of section 17-240.

6. Generally exercise the powers of peace officers with primary duties the enforcement of this title.

7. Seize devices that cannot be lawfully used for the taking of wildlife and are being so used and hold and dispose of them pursuant to section 17-240.
 
Last edited:
Well they get into force it in mode because there are those who run without a plug, then whittle one from the nearest green bush when the warden arrives. One of their favorite tricks is to fold up said green tree branch by forcing that last shell. Even our local warden has laughed about that one in conversation.

I guess my first question would be, is the plug in this shotgun original equipment? If not, you might want to find one that is. Because while this guy's attitude wasn't great, he did at least not cite you, when in fact he could have. And, whether you beat the case in court or not, it would have cost time off from work, attorney's fees, court costs... just generally more aggravation than it's worth. And, next time the gun might not be in the truck.

No, he probably shouldn't have. Can he legally??? I'd have to agree with Jeff and OT, there may have been fine print allowing consent, that you missed. Otherwise, by your statement above the warden asked to check licenses, game, and guns, and you had already consented to 2 out of 3 in offering your licenses and showing the game. Since all three were requested in the same stroke, it could be construed legally, that you consented to all of the above, in providing any one.

I'd write it off to experience and correct the issue with the plug in the shotgun.
 
Personally, I believe a plugged shotgun has nothing to do with protecting the resource. Bag and possession limits are what protects the resource, not how many rounds are in a gun. I would like to see the US Fish and Wildlife Service abolish this law and let the states decide if a round restriction for shotguns is really necessary for migratory birds. AZ does not require a plugged shotgun to take upland game birds, turkey, and small game. I don't see why migratory birds are treated differently.
 
Originally Posted By: OldTurtleQuote:a CA state run hunt for dove, rabbit and pig on one of the ecological preserves in the central valley. It was a special hunt that you had to apply for and be drawn to participate.
When you applied for permission take part in the said hunt, did you sign any paperwork as part of the application???

Since it was a State sponsored event on what sounds like a potential State controlled area, I'm betting there was some fine print, as well as a liability release, involved in the application forms that gave full authority for necessary inspections as deemed necessary by the agent...Maybe not worded exactly that way but similar...

A lot of applicants to similar events are so involved in the application being totally correct that they gloss over the fine print as to personal rights...

The hunt took place on a private ranch. The ranch is owned by a group that allows hunting and it is located in a state ecological reserve. The state then has special hunts on the property twice a year to a limited number of hunters. There was not any paperwork for liability presented. For those from CA, the draw is available through the ALDS system, the new CA licensing system.

I feel like the warden should have asked for permission to see the guns instead of opening the truck himself. It would have been really interesting if my shepard was with us and in the truck. She would have taken his head off as soon as the door was opened.
 
Originally Posted By: Raspack
I feel like the warden should have asked for permission to see the guns instead of opening the truck himself.

I think that's one point that we all agree on.

Originally Posted By: Raspack It would have been really interesting if my shepard was with us and in the truck. She would have taken his head off as soon as the door was opened.

Would it have made you feel better to see your dog attack the warden?
If your dog had been with you and had attacked the warden, what do you think his response would have been?
I think it would have been "really interesting".
 
Originally Posted By: FursniperPersonally, I believe a plugged shotgun has nothing to do with protecting the resource. Bag and possession limits are what protects the resource, not how many rounds are in a gun. I would like to see the US Fish and Wildlife Service abolish this law and let the states decide if a round restriction for shotguns is really necessary for migratory birds. AZ does not require a plugged shotgun to take upland game birds, turkey, and small game. I don't see why migratory birds are treated differently.

Bob, I agree completely. I think the plug law is totally useless.
KY state law requires a plug in a shotgun for almost all hunting.
 
Originally Posted By: FursniperThe officers had justification to inspect the firearms to make sure the birds they were shown were taken by lawful methods. In this case, the firearms in the vehicle could be searched for without a warrant. A motor vehicle is also mobile which creates an exigent circumstance to search without a warrant.





Not here it wouldnt, but wouldn't be surprised if it is in CA. In MT your vehicle is an extension of your home and is protected by a specific expectation of privacy clause on our state constitution
 
Originally Posted By: bigsky_songdogsOriginally Posted By: FursniperThe officers had justification to inspect the firearms to make sure the birds they were shown were taken by lawful methods. In this case, the firearms in the vehicle could be searched for without a warrant. A motor vehicle is also mobile which creates an exigent circumstance to search without a warrant.





Not here it wouldnt, but wouldn't be surprised if it is in CA. In MT your vehicle is an extension of your home and is protected by a specific expectation of privacy clause on our state constitution

That's interesting.
I can't find it.




It looks pretty much identical to the US Constitution.



The CONSTITUTION of the STATE OF MONTANA

PREAMBLE

We the people of Montana grateful to God for the quiet beauty of our state, the grandeur of
our mountains, the vastness of our rolling plains, and desiring to improve the quality of
life, equality of opportunity and to secure the blessings of liberty for this and future
generations do ordain and establish this constitution.

Section 11. SEARCHES AND SEIZURES. The people shall be secure in their
persons, papers, homes and effects from unreasonable searches and seizures. No warrant to search
any place, or seize any person or thing shall issue without describing the place to be searched
or the person or thing to be seized, or without probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation
reduced to writing.
 
Originally Posted By: 6724
i would have to agree, in colorado your vehicle is considered an extension of your home.

6724,
I can't find that anywhere in the Colorado Constitution either.
would you please post a link to that? I'd like to read it.
 
Originally Posted By: fw707Originally Posted By: bigsky_songdogsOriginally Posted By: FursniperThe officers had justification to inspect the firearms to make sure the birds they were shown were taken by lawful methods. In this case, the firearms in the vehicle could be searched for without a warrant. A motor vehicle is also mobile which creates an exigent circumstance to search without a warrant.





Not here it wouldnt, but wouldn't be surprised if it is in CA. In MT your vehicle is an extension of your home and is protected by a specific expectation of privacy clause on our state constitution

That's interesting.
I can't find it.




It looks pretty much identical to the US Constitution.



The CONSTITUTION of the STATE OF MONTANA

PREAMBLE

We the people of Montana grateful to God for the quiet beauty of our state, the grandeur of
our mountains, the vastness of our rolling plains, and desiring to improve the quality of
life, equality of opportunity and to secure the blessings of liberty for this and future
generations do ordain and establish this constitution.

Section 11. SEARCHES AND SEIZURES. The people shall be secure in their
persons, papers, homes and effects from unreasonable searches and seizures. No warrant to search
any place, or seize any person or thing shall issue without describing the place to be searched
or the person or thing to be seized, or without probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation
reduced to writing.


Article 2 section 10
 
Originally Posted By: bigsky_songdogsOriginally Posted By: fw707Originally Posted By: bigsky_songdogsOriginally Posted By: FursniperThe officers had justification to inspect the firearms to make sure the birds they were shown were taken by lawful methods. In this case, the firearms in the vehicle could be searched for without a warrant. A motor vehicle is also mobile which creates an exigent circumstance to search without a warrant.





Not here it wouldnt, but wouldn't be surprised if it is in CA. In MT your vehicle is an extension of your home and is protected by a specific expectation of privacy clause on our state constitution

That's interesting.
I can't find it.




It looks pretty much identical to the US Constitution.



The CONSTITUTION of the STATE OF MONTANA

PREAMBLE

We the people of Montana grateful to God for the quiet beauty of our state, the grandeur of
our mountains, the vastness of our rolling plains, and desiring to improve the quality of
life, equality of opportunity and to secure the blessings of liberty for this and future
generations do ordain and establish this constitution.

Section 11. SEARCHES AND SEIZURES. The people shall be secure in their
persons, papers, homes and effects from unreasonable searches and seizures. No warrant to search
any place, or seize any person or thing shall issue without describing the place to be searched
or the person or thing to be seized, or without probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation
reduced to writing.


Article 2 section 10



Section 10. RIGHT OF PRIVACY. The right of individual privacy is essential to the well-being of a free society and shall not be infringed without the showing of a compelling state interest.

Ok, I got it.
Now explain to me where it mentions searching a vehicle, and how does it prevent a search that would otherwise be legal under Article 11?
 
Back
Top