On a sunny day last week, I was sitting in one of my oft-mentioned spots when a random dude in a pickup pulled alongside. He just sort of stared at me for a few seconds. Eventually, I said a polite “Good morning” to him. Because I’m a swell guy. This is how the rest of the conversation went…

Bud Inski (clever, I know): You’re outside your jurisdiction.
**He’s main bitch was that I was sitting in the fine city to the south of Town. True enough, I’ll grant him.**
MC: Excuse me?
Bud: You’re not in Town.
MC: True, but I’m still in the state of California, sir.
Bud: That doesn’t matter. You have no authority to write tickets while sitting there.
MC: The California Penal Code disagrees with you sir, but thanks for your opinion.
Bud: The Supreme Court has ruled that you can’t sit outside your jurisdiction. Expect a call from your District Attorney.
‘Ol Bud drove away to my disbelieving shake of the head. This isn’t the first interaction I’ve heard of with Bud. My partner has had similar experiences with this guy. Same attitude, same complaint.
I have no idea what case he seems to be referencing with regard to the Supreme Court. I stand by PC 830.1(a). This is the section that gives specific law enforcement entities police authority any place in the state. I can’t count the number of times I’ve been “outside my jurisdiction”, conducted a traffic stop and subsequently issued a citation. Be it en route to court, home, or just out and about. I’m not about to let a heinous violation slide because I happen to be outside of Town.
Like I said, technically, I was indeed sitting in South City. However, I was just outside the Town limit. I was monitoring speeders still inside Town limits before they entered South City. Is it a technicality in Bud’s mind? Probably. Do I care? Um…nope. I’m using Town traffic & engineering surveys, not South City’s.
I’m hoping to catch Bud one day speeding in Town and stopping him in South City. Ah, what a lovely day that’ll be. And you’ll all benefit as well, because you know damn well it’ll be blog-worthy!
By the way, I’m still waiting on that call from the D.A. Huh.

Please note: I reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive or off-topic. Snark is encouraged. Being a prat is not.

12 thoughts on “Jurisdiction

  1. Dude, you got one hell of a hard on for trying to justify arresting a cop.

    I don't know what CP 837 is, but if you meant to refer to CA Penal Code Section 837, you are partially correct in that this is the section regarding citizen arrest.

    If the "public offense" to which you are referring is an infraction, as most vehicle codes are, you are s.o.l., because, to the best of my knowledge, 837 doesn't apply to infractions.

    Read that again…to the best of my knowledge…I leave confirmation up to, shall we say, North State DA. If I'm wrong, well hey, it happens and I wish you luck in finding an officer to make that hook for you.

  2. Perhaps I should add I've never seen it happen and can't imagine a circumstance in which it would.

    But again, good luck.

  3. I thought you knew what "public offense" meant because that is the term used in the statutory section you cited to us. Let's take a quick look at that:

    830.1(a) (a) . . . The authority of these peace officers
    extends to any place in the state, as follows:
    . . .

    (3) As to any public offense committed or which there is probable cause to believe has been committed in the peace officer's presence, and with respect to which there is immediate danger to person or property, or of the escape of the perpetrator of the offense.

    (emphasis added. It sounds like you are not sure whether you (as a peace officer) have PC 830.1(a)(3) authority for what you call infractions because the section authorizing peace officers uses this same term "public offense" as the citizen's arrest section does. I hope we can at least agree that "public offense" means the same thing in section 830.1 as it does in 837.

  4. If I'm wrong, well hey, it happens and I wish you luck in finding an officer to make that hook for you.

    Section 847 gives the private citizen the privilege of taking the arrestee to the magistrate himself. Bud Inski may even handcuff you during the ride for his protection and your own. Just watch your head — sometimes Bud brakes fairly suddenly. lol.

  5. Over here in the land of Aus we only have two levels of police, State or Federal. I have always wondered how the 3rd level of policing works over there. It would be a strange system if you had to put on the breaks and wave goodbye at Town boundaries. The section of the act you quoted makes perfect sense. Thanks for clearing that up.
    Unfortunately people like Bud Inski seem more concerned with impeding police when they should be grateful that you have seen a dangerous situation and taken action. After all speed kills be that the speeder himself or some other person who happens to be on the road at the same time. Who knows the last citation or warning you issued may have made Bud Inski’s journey a safe one.
    Cleanville don’t let your fantasy land issues crowd into real life. Your talk of using force against a police officer, deadly or otherwise, is dangerous and unstable. Go get help.

  6. Your talk of using force against a police officer, deadly or otherwise, is dangerous and unstable.

    Let's be clear here: someone, like Bud, is only allowed to to that to MC, if he observes MC committing a public offense in California and then MC resists a valid arrest under section 837. I imagine MC would submit to the handcuffs and go with Bud to the magistrate quiet and peaceful to take full responsibility for any public offense he had committed. Cause that seems like the kind of guy MC is. I can't imagine him resisting a legally valid arrest.

  7. Following the law is neither dangerous nor unstable. And the law in California is what I said it is. In understand that it might be different in the land of Aus, but in California, the policemen understand what section 837 means and will abide by it, even if they don't particularly like it.

  8. Hey MC! I see you've got the Cleanville virus on your blog too. I feel ya, my brother. 😉

  9. It seems to me that Cleanville likes to stir the pot and be contrarian for the sake of said pot-stirring. Don't you have anything better to do with your time, Cleanville?

Comments are closed.