Here is a question aimed at those who truly understand Maryland law. I hope this doesn't turn into an argument, I'd really just like to see everyone's thoughts and some productive discussion.
The question in itself is simple: When can a Maryland police officer make an arrest for a traffic offense?
My understanding, belief, and the side I favor is that the Transportation article of the Annotated Code of Maryland specifically states certain times when a police officer can make an arrest for a traffic violation.
Some have to be commited in the officers presence, others simply require the officer to have probable cause but going off of memory the Annotated Code states that an officer can make an arrest for a traffic offense in the following cases generally speaking:
*DWI/DUI
*DW Suspended/Revoked
*Not having satisfactory identification after committing a traffic violation
*Officer having PC to believe citation will be disregarded
*Fail to stop at weigh stations/hazmat violations
*Fleeing and Eluding
*Hit and Run
There may be a few more but that's basically it as far as I can recall off-hand.
This seems self-explanatory however, many officers I know believe that for any Must Appear offense, the person can be arrested.
The third idea I've heard is a little extreme, however, the logic does make sense. The Annotated Code states that traffic offenses are misdemeanors unless declared a Felony by statute. Assuming that a traffic violation is committed in the presence of an officer, is that not synonymous with a misdemeanor being commited in the presence of an officer? By that logic a police officer could arrest a person for any traffic violation.
*Note: As for the third and most extreme theory, I don't know of anyone who has put that theory into practice
Anyway, though this seems like a simple question, it does raise some interesting theories. By far the most common difference in policemen that I know is whether an arrest can be made for the specified offenses or for any must appear offense.
If anyone has any ideas or opinions, I'd love to hear them and moreso I'd love to see any relevant statutes or case law.
Again, I don't want this to turn into an argument, just a productive discussion that we can learn from.
The question in itself is simple: When can a Maryland police officer make an arrest for a traffic offense?
My understanding, belief, and the side I favor is that the Transportation article of the Annotated Code of Maryland specifically states certain times when a police officer can make an arrest for a traffic violation.
Some have to be commited in the officers presence, others simply require the officer to have probable cause but going off of memory the Annotated Code states that an officer can make an arrest for a traffic offense in the following cases generally speaking:
*DWI/DUI
*DW Suspended/Revoked
*Not having satisfactory identification after committing a traffic violation
*Officer having PC to believe citation will be disregarded
*Fail to stop at weigh stations/hazmat violations
*Fleeing and Eluding
*Hit and Run
There may be a few more but that's basically it as far as I can recall off-hand.
This seems self-explanatory however, many officers I know believe that for any Must Appear offense, the person can be arrested.
The third idea I've heard is a little extreme, however, the logic does make sense. The Annotated Code states that traffic offenses are misdemeanors unless declared a Felony by statute. Assuming that a traffic violation is committed in the presence of an officer, is that not synonymous with a misdemeanor being commited in the presence of an officer? By that logic a police officer could arrest a person for any traffic violation.
*Note: As for the third and most extreme theory, I don't know of anyone who has put that theory into practice
Anyway, though this seems like a simple question, it does raise some interesting theories. By far the most common difference in policemen that I know is whether an arrest can be made for the specified offenses or for any must appear offense.
If anyone has any ideas or opinions, I'd love to hear them and moreso I'd love to see any relevant statutes or case law.
Again, I don't want this to turn into an argument, just a productive discussion that we can learn from.
Comment