OPEN THE DOOR. >> HEY, SORRY. >> Open the door. >> Sorry. Sorry. Sorry. Sorry, sir. >> You Hey, hold on. >> Sorry, sir. I just stopped the bridge because I was trying Sorry, sir. Oh, get out. But my whole purse is in there and I had 60 grand in my purse and cash. We own a construction business and I just got paid a lot of money. Please tell me you locked the car. He said, "I did." Long story short, we were leaving and I walked out. My car was literally parked right out in front of that door. No, it's not. And it's gone. So is my purse. So is 60 grand. So is >> On January 29th, 2022 in Nassau County, Florida, a stolen vehicle report led to a felony vehicle stop and arrest on four separate charges. The suspect was taken into custody and charged with DUI, fleeing and eluding, grand theft and grand theft motor vehicle. This is that encounter. What makes this stop analytically significant is the convergence of three independent constitutional issues compressed into a single arrest sequence. >> My purse and catch. >> OPEN THE DOOR. >> I GOT your vehicle information added already. So, we're trying to get a hold of OnStar to see if they'll ping it for us. So, she's going to pull up video and see if I I'm going to look at >> says at 128 the car was still here, but within seconds of that, it left. >> All right, let me see if I recognize her. That might help. >> She's out front. I'm just trying to figure out what time she went outside so I can catch around another camera in here. >> So, she How long was she in here? >> Um, she's been in here for quite some time tonight. >> Did y'all happen to see like Was there a guy with her tonight? No, it was just her and she was sitting out on the bench and my husband gave her a cigarette and they walked around the car and whatever whatever. I watched him from inside >> and when he came inside I said, "Who is this behind him?" >> And he said, "Some girl sitting on the bench." She was just talking about how nice the car was. I showed her the car, blah blah blah. And I'm like, "Oh, okay." And he had his key in his pocket. Well, my key is in the car because if he has his key, he can lock the car. But if you go up and touch the car, it's because my key is in there. But my whole purse is in there and I had 60 grand in my purse in cash. We own a construction business and I just got paid a lot of money. Oh my god. Yeah. So I said, "Please tell me you lock the car." He said, "I did." Long story short, we were leaving and I walked out. My car was literally parked right out in front of that door. And I walked out and I said, "Where the is my car?" And he goes, "It's right there." And I said, "Quit playing." No, it's not. And it's gone. >> So is my purse. So is 60 grand. So is everything. >> We got your car. >> Thank god it back. >> Is it damaged? >> No, they they just got her arrested. It's going to be a minute. Huh? >> What did she think? >> They just getting her stopped and getting arrested. I'm just letting her know so she can relax a little bit. >> Where at? Is it >> on the island? >> We're at the island. >> No. >> Praise Jesus. >> I don't not that I know of. It's not. >> Are they going to count her money so we know that it's there? >> I just got the car. >> NOTHING YET. OKAY. YOU'RE JUST A MESSENGER. >> OPEN THE DOOR. SORRY. >> Open theing door. >> Sorry. Sorry. Sorry. Sorry, sir. >> You Hey, hold on. >> Sorry, sir. I just thought I was trying. Sorry, sir. I'll get out, sir. >> Get out. >> I'll get out. >> Sir, stop. I'm not I'm not >> Don't move. Stop resisting. Okay, listen. I'm going to pat you down. Do you have anything else on you that's going to poke me, stick me? >> No, ma'am. >> Cuz I don't want to get poked or stuck. Okay. You would do that to me, right? I mean, I've known you for quite a while. >> No, ma'am. >> Anything on you I need to be concerned about? >> Am I going to find anything illegal like contraband? >> The 60,000. Was it in the main part of the purse? >> Um, so not the main big pocket of the purse, but there's two zippers on the front of the purse. It was in the front zipper. The customer just came and gave me that money today. >> Okay. Cuz all there all that's in there is like 150 bucks. >> Okay. >> So, we have an idea where she went. >> Okay. >> We're holding that house right now and probably going to get a search warrant for it. But she's they've had plenty of time to >> do whatever. >> Do whatever. But we have her behind the wheel. We have >> all of those things. So, um but this is your your car, right? >> That's mine of my husband's. >> Okay. All right. Um just give us a few minutes to finish up with this. um verify a few things at that house and then we'll we'll go from there. >> Did you find her? >> Yes, sir. >> You've never been arrested. >> I got out. I got the key. >> My wife has a key in her purse. It was in the floorboard and I got out. We got out, walked off. I forgot to lock the car when we walked off. She went back, opened the door, hit the button, cranked it up, and left with my car. I did not give her permission. I do not want her in my car. >> She's definitely not in your car. >> All right, we got her. >> But I don't want her to give them >> No, she's >> No, we we're we're way past that to be where we're at right now. >> I want to shut the door. >> All right. So, I'm W Jackson, Nassau County Sheriff's Office. All right. Obviously, I'm going to be conducting a DUI investigation by based on some of my observations here. Uh and then obviously your driving actions. Okay. >> Before Deputy Jackson turns to the >> looting, but I also suspect you to be under influence of drugs or another chemical. Okay. I'm sorry, drugs or alcohol. So, I'll be conducting a DUI investigation. Uh, before we do any of that, I do have to read you your rights. Okay. Like I said, you are not under you are not free to leave. >> So, you understand each of these rights as I explain them to you? >> Yeah. >> Having those rights in mind, do you wish to speak to me? >> Um, not about anything you just asked me about. No. No. >> So, you want to invoke your right to remain silent? Uh, no. Not at all. >> No, you don't want to talk to me or >> No. Yeah, like No, I don't want to talk. >> Okay, cool. Um, when we get down to the jail, would you be willing to perform the field sobriety exercises? >> Um, sure. I guess. >> Sure. So, by that I mean doing >> Yeah. >> No, you don't want to do present charges on me. No. Yeah. No. >> No. You don't want to perform the fields of body exercises? Okay. So, you're aware that if you don't perform the fields of body exercises, that can be used against you in court at a later date. Correct. Okay. >> You're aware of that and you still don't want to perform them. >> Um I mean sir >> it's a yet >> no >> I I don't >> No, I don't know why they would inform it inform it. So no no sorry no >> I'm asking you do you want to perform the field sobriety exercises? You know the walk the line >> the you don't want to do any of that and again you're aware if you don't do that it can be used against you in court at a later date. >> Okay. >> So you don't want to do it. >> No. >> Okay. At this point, you're under arrest for DUI, fleeing of looting, uh, grand theft, and grand theft auto or grand theft motor vehicle >> for the do I do the >> That's fine. I just asked you that. >> Under Florida statute 812.014, theft is graded by the dollar value of the property taken. And the threshold matters here. Property valued between 20,000 and just under $100,000. triggers grand theft of the second degree, a felony of the second degree under Florida law. Motor vehicle theft alone qualifies as grand theft of the third degree regardless of value under that same statute. In this stop, the suspect drove off in a vehicle she had no authority to take with $60,000 in cash inside, aggregating the loss to seconddegree felony exposure before the vehicle was even recovered. Under Florida statute 316.1935, fleeing and eluding a marked patrol unit that has activated its lights and sirens carries escalating felony penalties tied to the manner of flight. In this stop, the suspect refused to stop for a marked unit attaching a standalone felony charge on top of the theft exposure before the vehicle stop concluded. Where the probable cause holds is straightforward. Deputies had the suspect observed behind the wheel of a reported stolen vehicle actively fleeing. That is textbook fourth amendment probable cause for arrest on Miranda. Under Miranda versus Arizona 384US 436, 1966, law enforcement must administer warnings before any custodial interrogation begins. Under Burkimer versus McCarti, 468US 420, 1984. A traffic stop does not constitute custody until the moment of formal arrest, meaning pre-arrest roadside questions require no Miranda warning. In this stop, Deputy Jackson read Miranda after announcing the arrest and before beginning the DU I investigation placing the sequencing exactly where the law requires it. Where the analysis becomes more complex is the suspect's response. Not about anything you just asked me about. No. No. Then uh no, not at all. Then no. Yeah. Like no, I won't talk. These answers directly contradict each other. Under Burkis versus Tomkins 56US 370 2010, the Supreme Court held that invocation of the right to silence must be unambiguous silence alone or contradictory responses like these. Do not automatically invoke that right. In this stop, Deputy Jackson chose to clarify rather than exploit the ambiguity, continuing to ask until the suspect gave an affirmative answer about her willingness to speak. Where that approach holds is this by establishing an unambiguous waiver on the record. The deputy protected the admissibility of any statement that followed and closed any viable suppression argument on that issue on the FSE refusal under South Dakota versus Neville 459U s 553 1983. Refusal of a sobriety test is admissible non-estimonial evidence and carries no fifth amendment protection. Florida's implied consent statute 316.1932 extends that same principle. A suspect's refusal is routinely argued to a jury as evidence of consciousness of impairment. In this stop, Deputy Jackson warned the suspect three separate times of the admissibility consequences before accepting her refusal of practice that insulates that evidence from any future suppression motion. At the time of this analysis, the outcome of criminal proceedings in this matter was not publicly available. Deputy Jackson receives a B+. His Miranda sequencing was procedurally correct. His warrant first approached to the suspect's residence protected all evidence obtained there under Illinois versus MacArthur. 531U S 326 2001 and his triple FSE warning exceeded the minimum required by law. The single deduction is the profanity captured on body cam during the vehicle stop legally insignificant but permanently preserved on record. His procedural discipline throughout the remainder of this encounter sets a measurable standard for multi-charged felony arrests. The suspect receives a D. She fled a marked patrol unit in a stolen vehicle, physically resisted officers at the vehicle stop, delivered contradictory Miranda responses that failed to clearly invoke any right, and refused field sobriety exercises after three explicit warnings compounding her legal exposure at every single stage of this encounter. The victim couple receives a C+. Both were cooperative and credible throughout the investigation. However, leaving $60,000 in cash unattended in an unlocked vehicle in a public parking area was the necessary precondition for this entire event. And that security failure belongs in this analysis. Lesson one, never store large volumes of cash in an unattended vehicle. Under Florida statute 812.014, the dollar value of property taken determines felony grade the $60,000 here. elevated this from a motor vehicle theft to a secondderee felony that would not have applied otherwise. Lesson two, fleeing a marked unit is a standalone felony. Under Florida statute 316.1935, the moment a driver refuses to stop for activated lights and sirens, a separate escalating felony charge attaches independent of any offense that prompted the original stop. Lesson three, an ambiguous Miranda response protects no one. Under Burgus versus Tommpkins, contradictory answers do not invoke the right to silence a suspect who wants to stop questioning must say so clearly once and without contradiction or that right is not triggered. Lesson four, FSE refusal is evidence. Under South Dakota versus Neville in Florida statute 316.1932, declining field sobriety exercises after receiving the admissibility warning creates consciousness of impairment evidence that follows a defendant directly into trial. Lesson five, warrant discipline protects the case. Under Illinois versus MacArthur, choosing to freeze a residence and wait for a search warrant rather than forcing entry shields every item found inside from exclusionary rule challenge and protects the entire prosecution. Let us know if there is an interaction or legal topic you would like us to discuss in the comments below. We read all of them. If there is a body cam interaction or legal question you want covered, let us