I'm just telling you stop talking for one second let me count this money alright man we got one two three four five six seven eight alright they're right there in the center of my wallet $90 all together in the center of your wallet no I don't know what to say about this I'm hurting myself man you go Fabian stay right here follow me follow me oh I'm sorry it's it's the wind how are you doing what's going on where are you coming from I'm sorry where are you coming from you weren't at the hub were you no okay I just came from it's messed up I'm trying to make a point okay what's going on oh you have a couple warrants for your arrest Fabian I don't know yeah well I there were some more recent charges I think one's one would we're gonna confirm them I'm not saying that you have them for sure but I'm pretty sure you do on March 2nd, 2025 Body Cam Unit BWC 2 recorded a warrant arrest a search incident to that arrest and a property inventory three distinct legal procedures each carrying its own constitutional requirements under the Fourth Amendment can you keep your hands out of your pockets yeah just don't reach for anything keep your hands out of your pockets yeah stay here though where are you going just put it right here okay go ahead place your hands behind your back turn around turn around I'm gonna put you on a I'm gonna put you on a yeah I know that's why I'm doing that because you're gonna keep doing it I think I have contact with baby and I have two or more for us and I need your help direct the type of team I want what's the last four of your social 7 8 0 4 7 8 0 4 7 8 0 4 what's it for we're gonna find out I just had to put you an ID because you kept reaching in your pockets make sense alright so you had two one was a magistrate warrant one was a 10 41 0 8 10 15 1 was a EPU hold so what did they tell you when you went to the EPU hold I just went on a who was it so did did he tell you expect to hold to come out or anything like that no all we were doing was just I got an appointment I got my car in my pocket she's lying we were there they had a warrant for me they tried to take me out yeah we didn't it's because you you were gonna go to the hospital I still gotta go you're not going I can't get any medical attention uh what do you need to go to the hospital for baby hey man trying to rip my jacket off huh trying to rip my jacket I I was on a zipping it what do you need to go to the hospital for Phoebe this feel OK on you you can just put a little bit on my arms and just too much I think you're on you and your pants that I took my see that's why you don't reach in your pockets right yeah but I was just gonna grab the f*cking N*pple case it's cold I gotta eat cold from work I think of the shoplifting at Walgreens is the one I was aware of if that's not what your warrants for then you'll probably just have another one guess we have to go pick them up we won't carry them on us why not I don't know I just don't I don't know what it is but alright can you go to with that officer well I'll take it I'll take it yeah I'm grabbing your stuff oh can you just grab my money because it's fine yeah take that man come on we'll get it we'll get it we're I'm gonna get it I see exactly where it's at it's $1 alright it's fine though come on come on come on can you grab this cash for me yeah and my wallet sit down under the Fourth Amendment a warrantless arrest in public requires probable cause established at the moment of contact when an active warrant exists that calculus changes entirely the Supreme Court held in Payton versus New York 1980 that a valid arrest warrant carries a prior judicial determination of probable cause the arresting officer needs no independent basis to reestablish that showing at the point of contact two warrants were confirmed here one a magistrate warrant one an emergency psychiatric hold both active at the time of contact the arrest was constitutionally grounded following a lawful custodial arrest the Fourth Amendment permits a full search of the arrestee's person without any additional justification in Chimel versus California 1969 the Supreme Court held that this search extends to the person and the area within immediate control what courts call the wingspan rule United States versus Robinson 1973 clarified that for a custodial arrest the full search of the person is automatic no separate probable cause or reasonable suspicion is required the search of jacket pockets and outer clothing here falls squarely within Robinson's rule no Fourth Amendment violation attaches to that search the officer's repeated instruction to keep hands out of pockets is grounded in officer safety doctrine established under Terry versus Ohio 1968 not in suspicion of additional criminal activity Terry permits officers to take reasonable precautionary measures during any lawful detention once arrest authority attached here that protective authority expanded further thank you so much I'll send you the email I don't know whatever you did dude where are you I have no idea bro I'll be right back I have no idea I'm just telling you stop talking for one second let me count this money yes she ain't cool man I've already passed stop doing stop stealing sh*t and you won't be in trouble I don't know you tell us you're a lawyer now no it's not what you're talking about alright man we got one two three four five six seven eight alright they're right there in the center of my wallet $90 all together in the center of your wallet no I don't know what to say about this I'm hurting myself man there should be 10 minutes left I got it yeah I'm gonna pass the phone to my partner every year should change 20 40 60 70 80 90 98 total yeah I like to I like to see them before I'm over there before transport officers counted and documented $98 in cash reading each denomination aloud with a second officer present as witness this is not merely good practice it is constitutionally grounded procedure Illinois versus Lafayette 1983 held that inventory searches of an arrested's belongings before booking serve three legitimate governmental interests protecting the arrestee's property from loss shielding officers from theft claims and preventing dangerous items from entering detention facilities Colorado versus Bertine 1987 added a critical requirement inventory procedures must follow standardized departmental policy an ad hoc search conducted under the guise of inventory absent standardized procedure violates the Fourth Amendment and risks suppression of any evidence recovered the dual officer count observed here with amounts read aloud and confirmed reflects direct compliance with Bertin's standardization requirement oh can you get my wallet man that way I can get her number so like I said I just ripped it last week they bring them all off the street huh let's go over here straight go straight keep going keep going take a left take another left in here hold on oh are you gonna take me to the hospital are you gonna at least see me at home let's go I'm not b*llshit bro shut the f*ck up I can't believe you can't remember the arresting officer receives a B the warrant basis was sound the search was constitutionally executed and the inventory procedure reflected genuine transparency 1 deduction expressing uncertainty about warrant validity at the point of contact suggests a gap in pre contact verification best practice requires confirming active warrant status through dispatch before initiating the encounter not during it Fabian receives a B minus non resistance during handcuffing and search was the legally correct choice physical resistance to a lawful arrest carries independent criminal exposure under most state codes however repeatedly reaching into pockets after explicit officer instruction despite verbal warnings created unnecessary escalation risk and extended the duration of the encounter without legal benefit compliance with lawful safety directives is always the tactically and legally sound choice when facing a warrant arrest the remedy for an unlawful stop is the courthouse not the street three takeaways from this encounter first a valid arrest warrant is self sufficient probable cause officers are not required to re justify the arrest at point of contact second search incident to arrest is automatic and broad there is no Fourth Amendment Protection against a full personal search once lawful custodial arrest attaches under Robinson third inventory searches must follow standardized procedure any deviation from departmental policy risks suppression of evidence and exposes the department to civil liability under section 1983 of title 42 of the United States Code let us know if there is an interaction or legal topic that you would like us to discuss in the comments below thank you for watching and don't forget to subscribe to our channel for more content on police court interactions