Driver Arrested In Ohio For Secret Car Compartment Full of Nothing

schwit1 writes about the hazards of driving through Ohio in a car with a secret compartment in the trunk. From the article: "Norman Gurley, 30, is facing drug-related charges in Lorain County, Ohio, despite the fact that state troopers did not actually find any drugs in his possession. Ohio passed a law in 2012 making it a felony to alter a vehicle to add a secret compartment with the 'intent' of using it to conceal drugs for trafficking." This is the first person arrested under the strange law.

Comments

Not the only state with this law

[EvilSS]

I know Florida has had a law on the books like this for a while and I'm sure other states do as well. I get why they think they need it but it's a serious abuse of our individual rights as it essentially makes it so you are assumed guilty.

Re:Not the only state with this law

[cheekyjohnson]

If it keeps us safe from terrorists, drugs, child molesters, or other Bad Things, anything is okay. Sacrifice all of your freedoms to stop the Bad Things and just be thankful you're living in the land of the free and the home of the brave.

Re:Not the only state with this law

[flyneye]

That's probably the mindset of the people in my hometown when they set up local statutes, (still on the books today, but unenforced). I am from the Middle of Nowhere. In the Middle of Nowhere it is illegal for; a black person to ride a horse through town, to be out after dark unescorted or to shout in public places.
I'm sure it means the same thing.

Re:Not the only state with this law

[oodaloop]

So did he. It was full of nothing.

Re:Not the only state with this law

[mattie_p]

Make sure you have a "carry concealed" permit for the pistol, otherwise you might otherwise face charges anyway.

Re:Not the only state with this law

[roc97007]

I used to work a convenience store back in college days. Once a day the supervisor would come by and pick up the receipts. The money was enough to make robbery tempting, but not enough to justify a Brinks service. His car had a small key safe incorporated into the bodywork, welded to the frame, and hidden by a false panel. It was big enough to hold the receipts for all the stores under his control, and was hidden cleverly enough to make discovery unlikely if the car was broken into, and perhaps even if the car was stolen. It's interesting to me that such a law would make this legitimate use of hidden compartments illegal.

Re:Not the only state with this law

[BlueStrat]

Seriously, if I had a secret compartment in my car, I would keep a copy of the King James Bible, a copy of the Constitution and Bill of Rights, and a registered handgun in there.

[sarc]
Terrorist!

Those are far, far worse than illegal drugs!

Carrying a copy of the US Constitution, according to the US government, is an indicator of someone possibly being a domestic terrorist, as is anyone who is a military vet, or a Christian, or a member of the TEA Party, or who talks about making the world a better place.

Enjoy your stay at GITMO.
[/sarc]

Strat

Re:Not the only state with this law

[Anonymous Coward]

This law has nothing to do with our rights or protecting against crime. It serves three things:

1: It provides the police legal ammo to threaten a person with disassembling their ride unless they immediately consent to search.

2: It provides a seized vehicle. Vehicle seizures are big money. Just 1-2 a day of cars can provide a department an added income in the millions of dollars from the police auctions. This is a civil action, so even if found innocent, one's ride is gone.

3: Ohio is notorious for their private prisons. Private prisons have a very strong lobby, and DAs and judges are forced to convict, or next election cycle, replaced by a candidate who will (with plenty of campaign dollars in their war chest coming in.) On March 27, 2012, Ohio signed a contract that they will keep all private prisons 90% full or else pay fines by the diem.

Private prison stock is of course having an Apple-esque rise due to this.

Because of the pressure to keep the private prisons full, it would not be surprising that even the cops on the beat may have an arrest quota, just like a ticket quota, but relying on how many people cuffs go on.

So, this law is a no-brainer. It gets cash-strapped areas free cars to sell, it puts people in the system who end up paying hundreds of thousands regardless of innocence/guilt, and the guilty ones make two private, well-heeled, powerful companies even more richer, on taxpayer dollars (which makes the state even more cash-strapped.)

Re:Not the only state with this law

[beelsebob]

Not quite the same thing, but in the UK, we have a crime of "going equipped" – that is, carrying tools of the trade to rob houses etc. It's effectively the same law, just with a different target.

Re:Not the only state with this law

[Anonymous Coward]

One of my friends is a defense attorney. He had a client who was arrested for carrying a concealed weapon while walking down the street (open carry is completely legal). The gun was concealed, by a belt holster. Apparently, under the law, having the gun in a holster counts as concealed in my state and the only way to comply is to either carry it in your hand, have it slung or have it classified as a hunting weapon. That's right, a completely visible handgun in a holster is concealed but a hunting rifle hidden in your coat isn't.

Re:Not the only state with this law

[Anonymous Coward]

Ask the little old lady in Florida who lost her life savings years ago because the thieving government passed a law that says if you have over x amount of cash then you must be a drug dealer. Her family had lost everything during the famous bank collapse and she of course didn't trust banks. They let her out of jail acknowledging she wasn't a drug dealer but AFAIK she never got her money back. She was far from being the only one robbed by the USA Protection Racket.

Re:Not the only state with this law

[Albanach]

No, the article proves that having a car that reeks of marijuana and has a secret compartment is enough to get you arrested.

Strangely, they forgot to copy that line from the article that spawned the story.

Re:Not the only state with this law

[arth1]

Seriously, if I had a secret compartment in my car, I would keep a copy of the King James Bible, a copy of the Constitution and Bill of Rights, and a registered handgun in there.

The constitution and amendments, I can understand, but please lose the instrument of murder.
And the gun too.

Re:Not the only state with this law

[Sentrion]

In between drug runs I would chose to keep a ziploc bag of dog shit in the secret compartment. That way when I get pulled over and my secret compartment is discovered, if they ask "what do you keep in here?" I'd just say "I keep my shit in there." Then when they start poking and sniffing around they can't say I didn't warn them. I'd like to see them bring me to trial for having a compartment full of shit.

Re:Not the only state with this law

[Firethorn]

I've heard about stuff like what the AC mentioned. From what I understand that particular interpritation is routinely defeated whenever it reaches a judge or jury. Problem is that the person often plea-bargains out, resulting in a 'conviction' without precident.

Even if they know the dude will be able to get off in a trial, it amounts to police harassment to the tune of thousands of dollars to defend yourself. Even if the charges are dropped before significant lawyer bills, it can still add up to harassment along the lines of this poor guy.

I've also heard where cops take 'concealed' to mean that there's an angle it can't be seen from, as opposed to not being able to be seen from any angle. As such, 'rubber banded to your hip' would still count as concealed if the cop can't see the firearm THROUGH your body. This resulted in jokes about carrying it on the top of your head.

Re:Not the only state with this law

[nephorm]

Do you mean the 33 year old stripper whose life savings was confiscated while it was in transport to purchase a nightclub? Daily Mail

Re:Not the only state with this law

[gagol]

You sure are lonely and blue, following this link you will make it through : http://dumblaws.com/

Make sure to check you local laws mate, unless you want to be some cop bate.

Re:Not the only state with this law

[wonkey_monkey]

"burglarious instruments"

Got their second album.

Re:Not the only state with this law

[N1AK]

Depends where you are I suppose. Are you black and look like you have too much money for someone of 'your kind'? Then you're probably concealing drugs. An upstanding white congressman *cough* *cough*? Carry on about your day sir, sorry to inconvenience you.

Re:Not the only state with this law

[Arethan]

Just plain wrong. Many states share reciprocity and honor CCP's issued by other states in the union. It's really not that much different from marriage licenses.
http://www.usacarry.com/concealed_carry_permit_reciprocity_maps.html

Strange indeed

[reboot246]

Does this law apply if you buy a used car and you don't even know about the hidden compartment? Surely this can't be Constitutional.

Mind Readers? Thought Crime?

[hurwak-feg]

How do the LEOs know what someone's intention is? I could argue it is to store sensitive work material or items sought after by thieves. What is wrong with putting drugs in there? I have a prescription for Oxycodone before. There are plenty of junkies that would love to get their hands on that. So does this mean police can arrest someone because they think they might have intentions of doing something illegal? Are they going to compensate people for their time and legal fees for arrest based on nothing more than speculation? This is insane. I will admit I didn't RTFA.

Re:Mind Readers? Thought Crime?

[Fwipp]

Well, you see, he's black: http://www.nuttynewstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Norman-Gurley.png

Therefore, he's obviously all caught up in drugs, and the police have done a fine service by removing this violent criminal from society.

Re:Mind Readers? Thought Crime?

[physicsphairy]

The summary is somewhat misleading. Per the linked law:

To enact section 2923.241 of the Revised Code to prohibit designing, building, constructing, fabricating, modifying, or altering a vehicle to create or add a hidden compartment with the intent to facilitate the unlawful concealment or transportation of a controlled substance, prohibit operating, possessing, or using a vehicle with a hidden compartment with knowledge that the hidden compartment is used or intended to be used to facilitate the unlawful concealment or transportation of a controlled substance, and prohibit a person who has committed a first or second degree felony violation of aggravated trafficking in drugs from operating, possessing, or using a vehicle with a hidden compartment.

His intent is irrelevant due to his prior felony conviction. That is what has him in trouble. I imagine the 'intent' clause is mostly for people found with actual drugs or weapons stored in the compartment, in which case their intent is obvious.

Re:Mind Readers? Thought Crime?

[whoever57]

and prohibit a person who has committed a first or second degree felony violation of aggravated trafficking in drugs from operating, possessing, or using a vehicle with a hidden compartment.

So the jury get to hear about prior convictions before deciding on the accused person's guilt. Neat!

Re:Mind Readers? Thought Crime?

[arth1]

Or do you believe that all slates are cleaned after jail time is finished?

Only in civilized countries.

Re:How did they prove intent?

[weilawei]

"We apparently caught them between runs, so to speak, so this takes away one tool they have in their illegal trade. The law does help us and is on our side," says Combs.

Apparently? So, you own a house, and your wife was away for a week. I'm going to slander and libel you for being an adulterer, even if I verified that you didn't have anyone in the house for a week, because you were apparently between mistresses. What a cock-up and an abuse of the legal system.

The law says it’s only a crime if the hidden compartment is added with the “intent” to conceal drugs, but it also outlaws anybody who has been convicted of felony aggravated drug trafficking laws from operating any vehicle with hidden compartments.

Can anyone find the arrest record/docket and figure out exactly how they alleged intent, or that he was formerly convicted of felony aggravated drug trafficking laws? Otherwise, this looks like a money grab to me.

As for the car itself, the Institute for Justice’s 2010 “Policing for Profit” report calculated that law enforcement officials in the state have collected more than $80 million in shared proceeds from asset forfeiture funds. Oh, and the hidden compartment law exempts vehicles being operated by law enforcement officers, so if state troopers can come up with an excuse to use the ride they just grabbed, they may be able to keep it for themselves.

Read section (I) of the law for the whole story

[Japher]

http://www.legislature.state.oh.us/bills.cfm?ID=129_SB_305
(I) This section does not apply to a box, safe, container, or other item added to a vehicle for the purpose of securing valuables, electronics, or firearms provided that at the time of discovery the box, safe, container, or other item added to the vehicle does not contain a controlled substance or visible residue of a controlled substance.

So it's OK to have a hidden compartment in your car as long as it does not contain a controlled substance or visible residue of a controlled substance. For the record, I still think the law is crap but it's not as bad as the article makes it out to be.

Interesting...

[asmkm22]

As bad as the law is, according to the law's language itself, he shouldn't have been arrested. Here's the last section of the law:

(I) This section does not apply to a box, safe, container, or other item added to a vehicle for the purpose of securing valuables, electronics, or firearms provided that at the time of discovery the box, safe, container, or other item added to the vehicle does not contain a controlled substance or visible residue of a controlled substance.

Only one section of the law mentions the word "intent" and that's in reference to actually building or installing the hidden compartment. So unless this guy also had a prior drug felony, or unless they could show he installed the compartment himself, there's no real case against him. I'm guessing he has a record though, which is why the went forward with the arrest.

Re:How did they prove intent?

[weilawei]

And in states like MA, this sort of "overwhelming smell of marijuana" (which cannot later be verified if it was a lie), is NOT probable cause, for the exact reason that police often lie. I have personally had my ripped apart for a police officer claiming I had marijauana (which I did not). I was let go after an illegal search and detention of myself and my passenger, and given a ticket for failing to use my turn signal (while I was going straight, not changing lanes). The cost of a lawyer was simply too high (and I did consult multiple lawyers) to purpose prosection.

Re:How did they prove intent?

[Dahamma]

Thanks for clearing that up. We were all desperately hoping the missing word wasn't "ass"...