[Discussions / Questions] San Andreas Penal Code

Find all the Laws and Acts of San Andreas in this forum. Also contains the full Penal Code to list all crimes and punishments.

Moderators: Rare, Lead Admins

Post Reply
User avatar
San Andreas State Clerk
State Clerk
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2016 4:31 am

[Discussions / Questions] San Andreas Penal Code

Post by San Andreas State Clerk » Tue May 26, 2015 1:19 am

A new topic for questions / comments / discussions since this is a new code with a lot of changes from previous editions. Anyone can answer these questions however these answers should only be seen as legally binding / reflect the views of the LSRP court system if they come from 'Laos_Macen' or 'Conti'
State Clerk Wiliam Benson
Office of the State Clerk
San Andreas Executive Branch

User avatar
idreadrasta
Bronze Member
Bronze Member
Posts: 230
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2012 2:01 pm
Ingame name: Julian_Goode
Location: Slovenia

Re: [Discussions / Questions] San Andreas Penal Code

Post by idreadrasta » Tue May 26, 2015 4:07 pm

Under (12)15. Probable Cause & Plain View Policy, it states:
3. Probable Cause does not have a specific definition, but refers to

And then a spoiler is underneath but says the following:

So long as one party (either person on the phone, in a facility, or other location where a conversation or event is being recorded) is aware of the situation.

Which makes no sense to me.

User avatar
Laos_Macen
Wannabe Don
Wannabe Don
Posts: 3922
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2007 3:15 pm
Ingame name: Laos_Mason

Re: [Discussions / Questions] San Andreas Penal Code

Post by Laos_Macen » Tue May 26, 2015 4:39 pm

idreadrasta wrote:Under (12)15. Probable Cause & Plain View Policy, it states:
3. Probable Cause does not have a specific definition, but refers to

And then a spoiler is underneath but says the following:

So long as one party (either person on the phone, in a facility, or other location where a conversation or event is being recorded) is aware of the situation.

Which makes no sense to me.

fixed.

User avatar
knppel
Wannabe Don
Wannabe Don
Posts: 1955
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2014 12:20 am
Location: Capitol Tower

Re: [Discussions / Questions] San Andreas Penal Code

Post by knppel » Tue May 26, 2015 5:39 pm

As a matter of fact, probable cause is getting abused. I am still fighting at court, since October.
I am terribly disappointed this vague paragraph is still being kept up as it theoretically allows a Police Officer anything, up to incarceration of innocent citizens , who than have to waste months and hundreds of thousand of dollars on lawyering cost.
All that to get rid of a charge that only exists because an Officer made up "probable cause".

If my court case would not be delayed since ages, I would already be fighting this major balance problem in the relation of Los Santos' LEO's and the citizens, now thanks to the in 12.15 mentioned possible court measures against this I have wasted half a year instead only to first get rid of my charge, which damages my credibility in legal matters.

While we are at it, traffic violation ticket regulations have major flaws in exactly the same direction.
When I receive a ticket, I have 72 hours, live, no matter if in town or not, to pay it, elsewise the Police comes and arrests me right away without giving me any chance to pay.
If a ticket was wrongfully issued, the usual process is to report this to Internal Affaires, who even if taking notice of the mistake (which is not a problem per se- mistakes can happen, they just need to be sorted out!), will need way more than 72 hours to sort the case, which leaves the citizen in a dangerous greyzone as Police Officers not involved in the IA report, aka the huge majority of the forces, might in the meanwhile simply see the open ticket and decide to enforce the open charge.

Regards
Carry Saunders
Image

Image

User avatar
knppel
Wannabe Don
Wannabe Don
Posts: 1955
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2014 12:20 am
Location: Capitol Tower

Re: [Discussions / Questions] San Andreas Penal Code

Post by knppel » Tue May 26, 2015 6:11 pm

P.S.
How comes the Los Santos Penal Code has absolutely nothing that mentions repeated offenses?
I have often seen Officers not even checking a suspect's criminal history upon detainment or arrest.
The result of this, legal citizens get treated equally as murderers who sat off their sentences, and the police of course makes use of this - When I was out of town for some days, as mentioned above, no less than six police officers with guns in hand was waiting for me because there was an open ticket they could enforce!
If upon enforcing a charge or fulfilling a warrant the officers/deputies charged with the task would be forced to first hand check the suspect's record, and then treat him or her accordingly- such as calling and summoning me to the PD for my failure to pay, instead to storm my property with an army- a lot of conflict situations could be prevented- and as a matter of fact this city as a whole suffers from a deep distrust not only from the population towards the police, but as examples such as above show, just the same the other way.
It is no wonder people often refuse to cooperate with authorities under circumstances such as these- my own experiences are harmless compared with what I have heared from other people who have less space to publicly voice their opinion.
Image

Image

User avatar
Disney
- Silver Member -
- Silver Member -
Posts: 1309
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 6:16 am
Ingame name: Walt Disney
Location: disneyworld.disney.go.com

Re: [Discussions / Questions] San Andreas Penal Code

Post by Disney » Tue May 26, 2015 7:18 pm

knppel wrote:When I receive a ticket, I have 72 hours, live, no matter if in town or not, to pay it, elsewise the Police comes and arrests me right away without giving me any chance to pay.
If a ticket was wrongfully issued, the usual process is to report this to Internal Affaires, who even if taking notice of the mistake (which is not a problem per se- mistakes can happen, they just need to be sorted out!), will need way more than 72 hours to sort the case, which leaves the citizen in a dangerous greyzone as Police Officers not involved in the IA report, aka the huge majority of the forces, might in the meanwhile simply see the open ticket and decide to enforce the open charge.

Pay the ticket and then make the report. Have them reimburse you AFTER the fact if you feel the monetary issue is an actual problem.

As for repeated offenses, that is putting too much power into LEO's hands and is far too objective.
 
[redcoat slayer]

User avatar
Laos_Macen
Wannabe Don
Wannabe Don
Posts: 3922
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2007 3:15 pm
Ingame name: Laos_Mason

Re: [Discussions / Questions] San Andreas Penal Code

Post by Laos_Macen » Tue May 26, 2015 9:13 pm

Disney wrote:
knppel wrote:When I receive a ticket, I have 72 hours, live, no matter if in town or not, to pay it, elsewise the Police comes and arrests me right away without giving me any chance to pay.
If a ticket was wrongfully issued, the usual process is to report this to Internal Affaires, who even if taking notice of the mistake (which is not a problem per se- mistakes can happen, they just need to be sorted out!), will need way more than 72 hours to sort the case, which leaves the citizen in a dangerous greyzone as Police Officers not involved in the IA report, aka the huge majority of the forces, might in the meanwhile simply see the open ticket and decide to enforce the open charge.

Pay the ticket and then make the report. Have them reimburse you AFTER the fact if you feel the monetary issue is an actual problem.

As for repeated offenses, that is putting too much power into LEO's hands and is far too objective.


Exactly. We wanted consistency and ignored a lot of requests for repeat offenders because this is a game about committing crimes.

As for fines, Disney also pretty much got it.

User avatar
iFlyKid
Law
Law
Posts: 914
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 4:22 am
Ingame name: P.O. Derek Rodriguez
Location: New York, NY

Re: [Discussions / Questions] San Andreas Penal Code

Post by iFlyKid » Wed May 27, 2015 3:11 am

Just to clarify a small change. You claim a 'civilian' is defined as any 'on-duty' peace officer or national guardsman, same for Government Employee in relations to local police. Peace officers of any caliber or sworn officer are still peace officers even off-duty followed by the 24/7 365 blue-line notion in the states (Now I'm not talking on behalf of the SASD since they have other off-duty protocols). According to the LSPD handbook we can still exercise partial law-enforcement power even off-duty such as detaining a person for said misdemeanors that we witnessed in plain sight. Is there a typo error or is this how it should be in San Andreas? Pretty sure this will add confusion after confusion.
Image

User avatar
Laos_Macen
Wannabe Don
Wannabe Don
Posts: 3922
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2007 3:15 pm
Ingame name: Laos_Mason

Re: [Discussions / Questions] San Andreas Penal Code

Post by Laos_Macen » Wed May 27, 2015 3:43 am

iFlyKid wrote:Just to clarify a small change. You claim a 'civilian' is defined as any 'on-duty' peace officer or national guardsman, same for Government Employee in relations to local police. Peace officers of any caliber or sworn officer are still peace officers even off-duty followed by the 24/7 365 blue-line notion in the states (Now I'm not talking on behalf of the SASD since they have other off-duty protocols). According to the LSPD handbook we can still exercise partial law-enforcement power even off-duty such as detaining a person for said misdemeanors that we witnessed in plain sight. Is there a typo error or is this how it should be in San Andreas? Pretty sure this will add confusion after confusion.


the PD guide book is now incorrect and you can only exercise authority as on-duty officers. When you decide how to distinguish when you are on-duty is up to PD policy, but otherwise a citizen's arrest is more than appropriate.

User avatar
Bladeraven
Mafia
Mafia
Posts: 511
Joined: Tue May 08, 2012 1:27 am

Re: [Discussions / Questions] San Andreas Penal Code

Post by Bladeraven » Wed May 27, 2015 7:59 am

(4)02. Failure To Pay A Fine ↑
A person who fails to pay a fine or court ordered fee within clearly stated and allotted time period.
A person CAN be given the opportunity to pay all fines in lieu of being arrested when being approached.
- Penal Code (4)02 is a misdemeanor punishable by 15 minutes imprisonment. This falls under Officer Discretion.


This is fine and well for people who have unpaid overdue fines and haven't had a charge added to their record yet.

However...

How does this relate to arrest warrants that have already been filed and 402 charges that have been applied to the MDC for the arrest of the subject? Does the officer serving the warrant HAVE to arrest them at that point (as it IS a warrant, not just an unpaid fine) or can the officer serving the warrant offer them the chance to pay the fines? Serving an arrest warrant that someone else made for 402 is different than just pulling someone over and seeing that they have an unpaid overdue fine with no charge added yet. If someone else wrote the arrest warrant, I am not comfortable giving them the option to pay the fine, as the person making the warrant may have intended for their arrest. Conversely, if I have to make an arrest warrant for someone who failed to pay a fine, I am not comfortable with some other officer letting them pay the fine and not arresting them (essentially cancelling my warrant...) on the charge that -I- filed. It says 'officer discretion' but if there is an arrest warrant, it doesn't clarify which officer's discretion it is... the one that made the warrant, or the one that is serving the warrant.

This should be clarified before the code is effective or it -will- cause confusion for currently existing warrants.
Last edited by Bladeraven on Wed May 27, 2015 9:28 am, edited 1 time in total.
Image
[Bladeraven / Morales / Moriarty / Gagnebin / Matt]
"I live how I want, you chase what you want to be."

Former LSRP Tester - Probation Management
Former LSPD Captain II - Asst. Director of Detectives & Internal Affairs (Amanda Morales / Ian Moriarty)
Former LSRP Governor's Office Representative
SADOC Sergeant (Jason Gagnebin) - CERT
SASD - Amanda Morales (Internal Affairs)

User avatar
iFlyKid
Law
Law
Posts: 914
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 4:22 am
Ingame name: P.O. Derek Rodriguez
Location: New York, NY

Re: [Discussions / Questions] San Andreas Penal Code

Post by iFlyKid » Wed May 27, 2015 8:13 am

Laos_Macen wrote:
iFlyKid wrote:Just to clarify a small change. You claim a 'civilian' is defined as any 'on-duty' peace officer or national guardsman, same for Government Employee in relations to local police. Peace officers of any caliber or sworn officer are still peace officers even off-duty followed by the 24/7 365 blue-line notion in the states (Now I'm not talking on behalf of the SASD since they have other off-duty protocols). According to the LSPD handbook we can still exercise partial law-enforcement power even off-duty such as detaining a person for said misdemeanors that we witnessed in plain sight. Is there a typo error or is this how it should be in San Andreas? Pretty sure this will add confusion after confusion.


the PD guide book is now incorrect and you can only exercise authority as on-duty officers. When you decide how to distinguish when you are on-duty is up to PD policy, but otherwise a citizen's arrest is more than appropriate.


So hold on. You're telling me that if I'm off-duty I am unable to exercise police authority i.e. detaining a suspect even though PD policies state otherwise? Also I'm not sure if you're unaware peace officers are still sworn officers and they have authority even off-duty I don't think an off-duty officer is classified as a 'civilian' not in New York and certainly not in California.

Now if the PD policies are incorrect or being exercised wrongfully (which I don't believe so) is exactly why full transparency needs to be done so we can clarify on issues that can cause trouble for the department and employees in that nature. But again I highly doubt a law-enforcement official off-duty is relatively a 'civilian' as a sworn officer.
Last edited by iFlyKid on Wed May 27, 2015 8:27 am, edited 1 time in total.
Image

User avatar
Bladeraven
Mafia
Mafia
Posts: 511
Joined: Tue May 08, 2012 1:27 am

Re: [Discussions / Questions] San Andreas Penal Code

Post by Bladeraven » Wed May 27, 2015 8:25 am

iFlyKid wrote:
Laos_Macen wrote:
iFlyKid wrote:Just to clarify a small change. You claim a 'civilian' is defined as any 'on-duty' peace officer or national guardsman, same for Government Employee in relations to local police. Peace officers of any caliber or sworn officer are still peace officers even off-duty followed by the 24/7 365 blue-line notion in the states (Now I'm not talking on behalf of the SASD since they have other off-duty protocols). According to the LSPD handbook we can still exercise partial law-enforcement power even off-duty such as detaining a person for said misdemeanors that we witnessed in plain sight. Is there a typo error or is this how it should be in San Andreas? Pretty sure this will add confusion after confusion.


the PD guide book is now incorrect and you can only exercise authority as on-duty officers. When you decide how to distinguish when you are on-duty is up to PD policy, but otherwise a citizen's arrest is more than appropriate.


So hold on. You're telling me that if I'm off-duty I am unable to exercise police authority i.e. detaining a suspect even though PD policies state otherwise? Also I'm not sure if you're unaware peace officers are still sworn officers and they have authority even off-duty I don't think an off-duty officer is classified as a 'civilian' not in New York and certainly not in California.


I honestly feel like that's a legislation (not really Penal Code) issue regarding the Constitution's definition of peace officers and powers.
Image
[Bladeraven / Morales / Moriarty / Gagnebin / Matt]
"I live how I want, you chase what you want to be."

Former LSRP Tester - Probation Management
Former LSPD Captain II - Asst. Director of Detectives & Internal Affairs (Amanda Morales / Ian Moriarty)
Former LSRP Governor's Office Representative
SADOC Sergeant (Jason Gagnebin) - CERT
SASD - Amanda Morales (Internal Affairs)

User avatar
iFlyKid
Law
Law
Posts: 914
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 4:22 am
Ingame name: P.O. Derek Rodriguez
Location: New York, NY

Re: [Discussions / Questions] San Andreas Penal Code

Post by iFlyKid » Wed May 27, 2015 8:29 am

Bladeraven wrote:I honestly feel like that's a legislation (not really Penal Code) issue regarding the Constitution's definition of peace officers and powers.


It's both. Because if this is written in a penal code, ANY employee from the LSPD can be accused wrongfully of detainment by off-duty officers. Again there is absolute no transparency and the people who are held accountable are us the employees.
Image

User avatar
Bladeraven
Mafia
Mafia
Posts: 511
Joined: Tue May 08, 2012 1:27 am

Re: [Discussions / Questions] San Andreas Penal Code

Post by Bladeraven » Wed May 27, 2015 8:37 am

iFlyKid wrote:
Bladeraven wrote:I honestly feel like that's a legislation (not really Penal Code) issue regarding the Constitution's definition of peace officers and powers.


It's both. Because if this is written in a penal code, ANY employee from the LSPD can be accused wrongfully of detainment by off-duty officers. Again there is absolute no transparency and the people who are held accountable are us the employees.


What I'm saying is that this should be primarily governed by the Constitution's definition of peace officers and statutory powers, which can only be amended by a vote from legislators, as opposed to a clause in the Penal Code.
Image
[Bladeraven / Morales / Moriarty / Gagnebin / Matt]
"I live how I want, you chase what you want to be."

Former LSRP Tester - Probation Management
Former LSPD Captain II - Asst. Director of Detectives & Internal Affairs (Amanda Morales / Ian Moriarty)
Former LSRP Governor's Office Representative
SADOC Sergeant (Jason Gagnebin) - CERT
SASD - Amanda Morales (Internal Affairs)

User avatar
iFlyKid
Law
Law
Posts: 914
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 4:22 am
Ingame name: P.O. Derek Rodriguez
Location: New York, NY

Re: [Discussions / Questions] San Andreas Penal Code

Post by iFlyKid » Wed May 27, 2015 8:47 am

Bladeraven wrote:
iFlyKid wrote:
Bladeraven wrote:I honestly feel like that's a legislation (not really Penal Code) issue regarding the Constitution's definition of peace officers and powers.


It's both. Because if this is written in a penal code, ANY employee from the LSPD can be accused wrongfully of detainment by off-duty officers. Again there is absolute no transparency and the people who are held accountable are us the employees.


What I'm saying is that this should be primarily governed by the Constitution's definition of peace officers and statutory powers, which can only be amended by a vote from legislators, as opposed to a clause in the Penal Code.


Right, but I don't believe an off-duty officer by no means is considered a civilian. When you take an oath in the states you're always on-call even when you're off-duty. In my opinion I don't believe any form of government removes that power, it is something that comes naturally when you're sworn in. Which is why any off-duty LEO has the same power he would have on-duty that includes detainment following the arrest of the perpetrator because he witnessed the offense. In LS-RP any LEO witnessing a crime is enough to incarcerate someone.
Image

Post Reply

Return to “Laws & Acts of San Andreas”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests