I want to thank everyone who has posted positive comments and provided information. I’m in the middle of a hectic week for work, and out of town this weekend, so I’m not able to respond to each of you individually right now, but I will next week. Just know that I have read every single word when time allows and it is appreciated.
And please continue to post!
Thanks,
David
And yes you have a right to privacy on a public road in your private vehicle.
Just to address this common myth of the so-called “right to privacy”.
There is no “right to privacy” in the Constitution. Read the Constitution. It’s not there. The word “privacy” never appears even once.
This is similar to the myth of “separation of church and state”. Which also never appears.
What most people are referring to when they say “right to privacy” is the 4th Amendment’s prohibition of unreasonable search and seizure.
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
The short version is that when it comes to roadblock searches, MN courts have been somewhat sympathetic to the argument that these should be limited, but they have not taken them off the table entirely. There was a glut of 4th Amendment challenges back when states started ramping up drunk driving laws back in the 1980s.
Bottom line is getting this thrown out on a 4th Amendment appeal would be a very uphill battle that’s been tried before numerous times and shot down in other roadblock cases.
Grouse
I’ll stop being a Debbie downer on ya and give advice.
t became attached to my boat trailer, presumably 2 weeks before the incident, when I either put my boat into a lake or took it out of that lake.
^^ I would probably leave this out considering it shows your neglegince on more than one occasion.
Please let us know how it goes. Good luck.
Unfortunately I have seen first hand what happened to one of my favorite lakes once Eurasion Millfoil got into the system.
What lake please?
BK,
Lake Alexander in Morrison County. The lake had beautiful cabbage beds with walleye and bass on the edges. Use to take friends and their kids to fish bass on the weed edges. 30 – 40 bass in a few hours was not uncommon. Now the milfoil has taken over most areas, including rock humps, growing to the surface by mid summer, creating a wall of brown. Real shame.
Earlier this spring we had high water levels in So.MN.
My family were fishing from shore (at the launch) on RAYs lake (Le Sueur co.)
The Le Sueur county sheriffs water patrol came and launched their boat to chase down a boat that was cruising the lake. He left his truck and trailer in the water
(15min.) came back loaded the boat in the trailer pulled it out COVERED with weeds
hanging from the axel,frame,rollers and the motor. He then went over to the information board that has a bright orange sign that lists Rays lake is
INFESTED with EURASIAN MILLFOIL and staples a paper sign that declares a temporary NO WAKE restriction until further notice. He then proceeded to drive away dragging weeds to who knows where. I was going to snap a picture and post it but wasn’t fast enough.
I know that there is a ad in the OUTDOOR NEWS for a attorney that handles DNR violations might be worth checking it out.
good luck Frank (rod-man)
Unfortunately I have seen first hand what happened to one of my favorite lakes once Eurasion Millfoil got into the system.
What lake please?
Knife Lake
If any of you are interested in affordable legal protection against FUTURE violations or tickets, please friend me then send a PM. This protection is available to individuals or small business owners such as fishing guides.
I cannot assist with any violations that have already occurred.
Eric
You have 2 things working for you
#1 County/city may not prosicute I’m thinking it will be under city jurisdiction. I say this because, not the same offense but simular situation, I was given a driving without a dot healthcard at a check point and when I got a late payment notice the city of plymouth was listed as the plaintiff.
#2 the dnr officer will have to show in court, chances are he may not. If not case gets thrown out.
If this happened in chisago you may want to check into who pays court cost if judgment goes against you. This is trend happening all over now. So be prepaired.
Good luck David
I speak of jurisdiction on who is the plaintiff. If its the city would’nt the fine go to city and not the dnr or is there like a % that gets split up.
Its not hard to clean your boat you didnt so quit complaining and deal with.pay the fine….
It’s difficult for me to understand this.
On one hand, the checkpoints have proven to be unconstitutional. On the other, transporting aquatic vegetation is illegal and could be quite devistating. Regardless if the plants are invasive/exotic or not. Even non-exotics could severely effect another ecosystem.
And what does it cost us to have these checkpoints? Would the checkpoint only be illegal if a person is being charged with something?
Seems as though it would cost us less if the weeds were pulled off and no ticket was issued.
The only thing devastating about these weeds is fisherman who don’t know how to fish them.
Ecosystems are fine people.
Here’s an old Strib article on point: http://www.startribune.com/sports/outdoors/160129765.html
I wonder if the same people who think the roadside checks are a farce, would say the same thing if the roadside check was about searching for a missing kid? The answer is likely not.
I remember when a DNR officer did not need to ask permission to enter your ice shack and the courts said that to be illegal.
Yeah, one of the worse things ever to happen our PUBLIC resources was when the DNR busted that crackhead stuffing drugs down the ice hole.
It really hampers the Conservation officers ability to police and protect the tax paying publics resources.
The way I see it from the pictures you missed some weeds on your trailer. The amount in the picture shows that if you would have taken the time to look under your pontoon once and even twice you probably would have seen it. Personally I don’t want to get a ticket so I always check and double check the trailer for any weeds. It’s the law so what the heck is the problem. Pay the stupid 130.00 dollars and go fishing. Geez
This will be a County prosecution and not handled by a city. My guess is that they will schedule a day for these to appear in court and the CO will be there since this was a planned check point involved. The judge will most likely give everyone the same penalty and whip through them fast and head out to the golf course asap. Save yourself the wasted day of vacation and pay the fine. It will be cheaper in the long run. Unless you have a ton of money for a lawyer, the judge won’t care about your issues with road side checks and they might just get ticked off that you are wasting the courts time. At that point you’ll get the maximum penalty and so will everyone else waiting to plead their case, no matter what they are in court for.
I’m posting again to let everyone know that I respect your right to your opinions even if we disagree with each other. My purpose in posting this was not to argue or debate the merits of the purpose of the law with those who disagree. I posted it to try to get help from those people who want to remove the unconstitutional laws and enforcement and to provide information for those who may not be aware of the issue or are unaware of the slippery slope this is headed down. If I don’t respond to people on the other side of this issue directly, that is why. And believe it or not, I do read what you write, even if you are on the other side. I am simply not here to argue.
I will point out one thing, however. My original post was written, on purpose, for those who are completely unaware of these laws and enforcement methods. The same text was used for contacting lawyers, legal help groups and others who may not have the same level of awareness as us boaters. As it stands now, I’m representing myself without any legal help, so I need to be efficient with the use of my time. I only have time outside job hours to prepare for my case and my weekends are busy with preexisting obligations. Reusing the same text for multiple outlets was the only way I could effectively manage this. I’ve been aware of all the invasive species laws since they came into being and have been especially disappointed in checkpoint portion of the laws.
I forgot to include it in my original post, but effective July 1st, 2015, anyone found guilty of breaking this law, in addition to fines, will lose their ability to operate a watercraft until they complete an invasive species course. Again, I’m guessing there is a good chance those people who agree with this law are happy to see these additional measures being taken and I am not trying to change the minds of those people. I’m making this information available to those people who are not aware of and/or those who disagree with these laws so that they might decide to take action to remove the laws.
In this particular case, the rig was gone over by two separate adults when it was taken out of the last lake. The weeds in question had been embedded in the suspension system of the trailer, behind the wheels (dual axle), at the boat access and thus were not visible. Some rigs have a lot of cracks and crevasses where weeds can become trapped and in some cases they cannot be even be seen or removed without putting the boat back in the water, such as when the weeds are trapped between the boat and the bunks/rollers of the trailer.
I mention this, because for people with these rigs, I want them to be aware that they may receive a citation despite their best efforts to comply with the law, as was the case in my situation. This is a zero tolerance law, so if properly enforced by law enforcement, a single, short strand of weed is a violation. Enforcing it in some cases, for some people, and not in other cases, for other people, is a violation of your right to due process/equal protection. And enforcing laws via roadside checkpoints has already been ruled by the Minnesota Supreme Court to be in violation of the Minnesota constitution.
There were at least 2 and possibly 3 officers under the boat for 5 to 10 minutes in order to come up with the relatively small amount of weeds shown in the picture. Yes, I realize this is subjective and opinions vary all over the map on how much is significant. A lot of that has to do with how big a rig is and whether a large quantity of weeds is removed every time the boat is put in/out, as in my case. I believe, although intertwined when put into the bag, it represents separate strands that were found in the workings of the suspension system of the trailer. One strand wrapped around a surge brake coil can be longer when unwrapped than it exists when adhered to a trailer.
To those people who have offered support, thanks for taking the time to reply to my request. I know it isn’t easy to do so when there are strong emotions on the other side of this.
Those who believe as you do, that these laws are unconstitutional, can bring awareness to these overreaches by talking about it with others and urging them to push for change. Without a citation, contacting legislators and informing them that the laws violate the state constitution, as decided by the Minnesota Supreme Court, may make a difference. With a citation, allow the judicial branch to check the legislative branch by going to court.
Unfortunately, I believe it will require organization to have an impact, because it was organized groups that requested these laws and that will continue to request more laws, leading to increased violation of rights.
This is not merely about a single fine. After receiving the citation, my family and I discussed the issue on our way to our destination. As we had done everything feasible and safe to remove the visible weeds the last time the boat was taken out of the water, we were resigned to the fact that we may have to include $300 extra in the budget for boating in Minnesota each summer. With the base fine being $100 (the $130 includes administrative extras) and guessing at the possibility of 2 tickets per year, and given that a second citation doubles the fine, we came up with this $300 figure. This assumes only non-invasive weeds are present. Invasive weeds carry a higher fine.
However, with the changes coming in 2015, it is now not only a matter of fines, but also a loss of the ability to use a watercraft until completion of a mandatory course. The course is mandatory as of July 1st, 2015, for everyone trailering a watercraft in Minnesota anyway (including people coming to Minnesota from other states or driving through Minnesota), so it isn’t clear what happens if you already have the sticker and then get a citation. It isn’t clear if you need to re-take the course or if already completing the course is sufficient. Not completing the course/having the sticker and not being in violation of the weed transportation laws will only result in a warning at this point in time. My guess is that this will change over time.
In addition, the DNR has requested, and I have to assume will continue to request, the legislature (and Minnesota Judicial Council) to significantly increase the fines to the level of fish and game violations. It is unknown whether this will include increasing it from a misdemeanor to a gross misdemeanor and/or a payable offense to a criminal offense including a minimum of 90 days in jail. The most recent information I have indicates that the DNR has not yet requested a change from a civil violation to a criminal violation.
All this is to say that it is much more than paying a single fine for a single violation that has already taken place. It is about the unconstitutionality of the laws and enforcement methods, the harm they have caused citizens in the past and the impact they will have on everyone in the future. This is not just about boating. They set a dangerous precedence, allowing for continued erosion of our rights.
Thanks,
David
This will be a County prosecution and not handled by a city. My guess is that they will schedule a day for these to appear in court and the CO will be there since this was a planned check point involved. The judge will most likely give everyone the same penalty and whip through them fast and head out to the golf course asap. Save yourself the wasted day of vacation and pay the fine. It will be cheaper in the long run. Unless you have a ton of money for a lawyer, the judge won’t care about your issues with road side checks and they might just get ticked off that you are wasting the courts time. At that point you’ll get the maximum penalty and so will everyone else waiting to plead their case, no matter what they are in court for.
Agree X2
Is this the first court appearance you have had with this case? If so it will be a hearing where you will plead not guilty then they will set a date for the court trial. The CO will not be there.
DT
In this particular case, the rig was gone over by two separate adults when it was taken out of the last lake. The weeds in question had been embedded in the suspension system of the trailer, behind the wheels (dual axle), at the boat access and thus were not visible. Some rigs have a lot of cracks and crevasses where weeds can become trapped and in some cases they cannot be even be seen or removed without putting the boat back in the water, such as when the weeds are trapped between the boat and the bunks/rollers of the trailer. {Clipped}
David, Think of these points:
Law Enforcement in Minnesota has two chances to appear after the original appearance.
This may be a bit different in that is this considered being a Game & Fish Law violation or Motor Vehicle Moving Violation?
I would guess with the fine you list, that this is considered a Motor Vehicle, Moving Violation.
In these cases the first Court appearance you may speak with City or County Attorney prosecuting the case, even get fine reduced, pay Court costs and be done or you may request a Trial.
It is then that a Trial Date, this may be a range of time and your case may be first or last. If the Law Enforcement/conservation Officer does not show up, they will schedule a 2nd appearance where is the officer does not show up, you win by default.
Next, depending how things go, the Prosecutor may request a continuance to call additional witnesses and/or gather additional information. Thus your case may cost you 2-3 or more days of time off work.
From what some others have said, should you lose and if the Judge feels you’re wasting the courts time he may hit you with a much heftier fine, are you prepared for that?
Is fighting this and trying to set some precedence worth that much to you?
I am still of the opinion that you Knew and you Broke the Law! Like others have said, check and double check.
I know a guy prevented from Launching due to a few very short pieces of weeds stuck way back in his Prop. He had to remove the Prop to clean them off and thus had to go home that day as he didn’t have his Prop wrench along.
PS: If you really want to change the Law, get a hold of Buzz and work with him and others on Changing the Law via hearing and speaking with Legislators and others. Attend meetings of Watershed Districts, County Board’s, Cities, and Park Districts, etc. when they are discussing AIS Rules, Inspections, etc.
I’m going to jail.
I wonder if the same people who think the roadside checks are a farce, would say the same thing if the roadside check was about searching for a missing kid? The answer is likely not.
That’s not even a red herring.
The WORST thing that can happen by trailering weeds (or any other AIS) would be they enter another body of water…and the jury is still out if that’s even a bad thing.
Thanks David for taking the time to write that up.
Where is your hearings if I can ask?
Is this the first court appearance you have had with this case? If so it will be a hearing where you will plead not guilty then they will set a date for the court trial. The CO will not be there.
DT
They may well do that, along with every one else that got tickets that day. The CO will be there.
If it is a first appearance the CO will not be there. Did they tell you that he would?
DT
If it is a first appearance the CO will not be there. Did they tell you that he would?
DT
If you’re asking me the answer is no. I’m basing my opinion on the fact that this was a concerted effort to stop people at a road side check. There has been a number of new zeeb infestations found this fall. I don’t think the DNR is going to go light on anyone. This isn’t a case of someone riding an ATV 5 minutes during deer season outside legal hours.
All Im saying is that is not how the court system works. The first hearing us an arraignement hearing. Depending on the size of the County there could be hundreds of other defendants there. They will call you up, ask your plea and set it for a later date. If you contest the citation the CO will be at a later hearing. There could be a contested omnibus hearing, which is normally where you would argue the stop or it will go right to court trial. Just trying to help you with what to expect going through.
DT
Sorry about spelling, my phone has a small keyboard.
DT
Deertracker – I’m the original poster. You are correct as far as the progression of hearings. A first appearance (where you can request formal documentation of complaints and can plead one way or the other or plea bargain with the prosecutor, and pick a jury or judge trial), then a pre-trial (discovery process of trading evidence between the prosecutor and the defense and a motion to dismiss, if so desired), then the regular trial.
For this particular citation, there are not going to be a lot of people showing up at the same time in the courtroom for the first appearance, because it is a payable offense that does not require going to court. You can simply call up the number on the ticket and pay it over the phone. They do put a court date for the first appearance on the ticket, but I’m guessing the vast majority of people pay it rather than scheduling to appear on the court date. Even after calling the courthouse to tell them I’d be there, I still wasn’t put on the docket and had to be added that morning when I showed up.
I’m in between the first appearance and the pre-trial currently.
Thanks for your posts.
David
So where did this happen at? Have others come across road side stops?
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
