In Arizona, speeding (under 20mph over), "no tags," "too dark a window tint," etc, are all civil infractions, not criminal offenses. Knowing the police have 3 types of stops; a field interview, an investigatory stop, and arrest, and knowing you can walk away from a field interview at any time, the police only have "an investigatory stop" or arrest as their only way to detain you. Thus, here is how it might go:


• You: "Am I under arrest?"
• Cop: "No, I just pulled you over for ...."
• You: "Is that a civil infraction, or a criminal behavior?"
  
  
  • Cop: "It's criminal."
  • You: "Then I'll invoke my right to remain silent until I can find counsel."

    And then SHUT UP!!! 90% of all convictions come from the defendants own words.

  OR
  
  

• Cop: "It's a civil matter."

  If it's civil your "investigatory stop" is now a field inverview unless the police can find something criminal to tag you with.
  
  

• You: "Then this is a field interview, right?"
  
  
  • Cop: "Yes."
  • You: "Well then, I'm terminating this interview and will be on my way. Have a nice day,"

    And then leave.

  OR
  
  

• Cop: "No."
• You: "Am I free to go?"
  
  
  • Cop: "Yes."

    Then you go!

• Cop: "No."
  
  
• You: "Then I must be under arrest, or suspected of criminal activity. What is the arrest or what criminal activity am I being investigated for?"

  At this point, they will probably tell you they are conducting an "investigation... and not to interfere..." You smile, and now would be a good time to ask them if they've ever heard of Arizona v. Rogers.... You might be a really thoughtful Arizona Citizen and have a copy printed out ready to hand to them complete w/relevent passages high-lighted. "Have an nice day officier." Note: even if they can come up w/any excuse for "criminal behavior" they only have 20 minutes from the time they detained you to make an arrest or end the "investigation." But it hinges on "criminal behavior is afoot." No criminal behavior, no investigation. No investigation, it's a field interview, which you can terminate at any time.

Be careful, some things like reckless driving and speeding over 20mph over the limit are criminal so you need to know which are which. Also, you need to be polite and "cheerful" about it, not smug or sassy. Also be careful, I read one case where the cop called for "backup" because he had "one of those Constitutionalists!" I myself have always had "backup" called whenever I'm stopped. Except for the fear of getting the @#$% beat out of me, it's no big deal. Also, you should carry around one of those microrecorders. (Price Club sells one for $19.) I carry one in all my cars and on my person. In Arizona, only one person need know the conversation is being taped. It's up to you if you let them know they are being taped. Take your lumps, or ticket, but keep that tape in your possession. As long as you are the recorder of the tape you can present it as evidence in the trial. Keep to the above conversation, and stand for your rights! If you carry an AZDL, they might try the "implied consent" bit, saying you waived your right to ______ (fill in the blank). So far, the courts have openly stated you are waiving your 5th Amendment right and have to submit to the breath test. They have not been so brazen to enumerate the other rights you've waived... yet. If you don't carry an AZDL, then there is no "implied consent" and infact, it's one of the reason I don't carry an AZDL. I cannot be forced to give up one right to enjoy another.

Remember, I'm from Arizona; the real Arizona; you know, home of Barry Goldwater, the last elected representative of the people.

Also the above is not legal advice, and anyone who thinks it is, is just one brain cell short of a pair. It's simply a review of what might happen if you are pulled over by a cop in Arizona. What you do is up to you.

footnote: Here's another case that would tend to support the Rogers case: "We noted that "a brief investigative stop only requires `some objective manifestation that the person stopped is . . . engaged in criminal activity.'" Id. at 848 (quoting United States v. Cortez, 449 U.S. 411, 417 (1981)).