Illegal in Ohio to have a hidden compartment in your car, but only *if*...

JimCorrigan

JimCorrigan

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2011
Messages
4,115
Location
Pacific Rim
Car(s)
HMCS Velvet Glove; The Last Samurai
... see the part I highlighted in bold.

Source: Car and Driver

Car and Driver said:
In the war on drugs, the daily grind of law enforcement is enough to make even Sisyphus feel fortunate; at least the guy knew what his boulder would look like each morning. Cops who work to intercept traffickers, however, see ever-evolving methods of deceit in the transport of contraband. It?s no wonder, then, that the Ohio State Highway Patrol (OSHP) backed legislation last year making it a felony in the state to build or use a secret compartment in a vehicle.

Known as ?traps,? ?hides,? or ?clavos,? hidden compartments that exploit voids in a vehicle?s structure are certainly not a new phenomenon in drug running. But Republican state Senator Jim Hughes, the man behind the Ohio law, says the increasing sophistication of these devices and the escalation of their use has made it necessary to outlaw them.

Today, state-of-the-art trap construction taps into a vehicle?s factory-installed electronics, with additional wiring disguised as stock. Manipulating various controls in the correct sequence, similar to entering a cheat code into a video game, grants access to the compartments. These stash boxes, often located under seats, in airbag cavities, or beneath false floors, are undetectable to the untrained eye.

Neighboring Pennsylvania recently introduced similar legislation. California, Georgia, Illinois, and Utah have also criminalized hidden compartments.

The Ohio law specifically exempts law-abiding citizens who use a hidden compartment to secure legal firearms or valuables. Indeed, the law?s enforcement mechanism hinges on ?intent? to use the secret compartment for hiding drugs. In at least two cases publicized by the OSHP since the law took effect, individuals were arrested not for transporting drugs but for violating the new secret-compartment law. In one case, police say two cellphones were found in the compartment of a defendant who has a history of trafficking. Neither case has come to trial as of this writing.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio calls the new law an unnecessary expansion of drug-trafficking statutes already on the books. An ACLU representative suggests that the real goal behind the law is to give prosecutors an additional charge to throw at defendants, thus boosting the government?s bargaining power when negotiating pleas.

But the ban on secret compartments also gives law enforcement the authority to go after those who build and install them. A California man, Alfred Anaya, was sentenced last year to more than 24 years in prison for building secret compartments in vehicles used by a drug-trafficking operation. The Drug Enforcement Administration busted the cabal and Anaya, despite his claims that he was unaware his handiwork was being used illegally. Just say no, kids.
Click to expand...

Any thoughts?
 
Let's hope people who buy Chevy Impalas or Honda Crosstours are gonna be ok.

2012-Honda-Crosstour-Rear-Trunk1-1024x640.jpg

impala-1-blog480.jpg
 
More foolishness to add to the insanity that is the Drug War.


Next they will make it against the law to transport anything illegal in a vehicle.
 
Well that means I'd be breaking the law next weekend when I drive to Ohio. The 2013 Mini has a "hidden compartment" above the glove box. Guess I'll need to get a gun...

The article doesn't mention if this is actually law or something that is being pushed for. Clarification, anyone?
 
Can't be "secret" if it's official factory equipment, so you're good to smuggle some drugs in it :nod:
 
Gloveboxes or in floor storage compartments that were designed in to the car aren't hidden, they are just covered.
 
As someone who lives in Ohio and does not traffic drugs, I'm not bothered by the fact that this law exists, since it specifically states that you can have all the secret compartments you want, just so long as you don't use them to traffic illegal stuff (and don't put yourself in a position where the state can prove you intended to). Is the law really necessary? I don't know, since I'm not well informed on criminal drug issues.

What is truly disturbing, though, is that they are going after (or can go after) people who install these compartments. Since they are only illegal once they're used for smuggling illegal items, the fact that a someone designed and/or installed one was completely within the law. Whether or not the owner of the vehicle, who authorized the instillation, has intent is WAY beyond the responsibility of the guy being paid to do a legitimate job.

What's next, going after the guy selling knives at a sporting goods store because someone bought it and then used it to stab someone!?
 
A bartender can get sued for selling a drunk guy a drink, who then goes on to get into an accident.
 
CraigB said:
So it's illegal to do something illegal? Huh, learn something new everyday.
Click to expand...

That's why I agree that the law may have very little to do with cracking down on something they couldn't before, but instead has to do with laying more charges on people they're already prosecuting.
 
Problem is for law enforcement that every now and then they come across such modifications on a car, but without any drugs in them at the moment of the control ... so you have a drug trafficker infront of you on a "empty run" (or on his/her way to getting the drugs) but cannot do anything. This law is meant to close that gap so that if you are a drug trafficker, you can never be "at ease" in your modified vehicle ...

If this law does not pose a certain risk to "law-abiding citizens" as well is another question. I think overall it?s one of these laws that will just make it worse for everyone, and hardly for the people it targets. Just think about buying second hand. If you don?t know where to look, you might just have a ticking timebomb on your hand ...
 
Last edited:
Interrobang said:
Problem is for law enforcement that every now and then they come across such modifications on a car, but without any drugs in them at the moment of the control ... so you have a drug trafficker infront of you on a "empty run" (or on his/her way to getting the drugs) but cannot do anything.
Click to expand...

And what's wrong with that? If there truly is no other evidence that the driver/passengers own or traffic drugs, why should they be prosecuted and sentenced to jail? Also, the article claims that the law wouldn't be applicable in the above case, anyway, since an intent to hide drugs in the compartment must be shown. With a lack of other evidence, the driver could make a reasonable case that the compartment is for hiding a gun or non-drug valuables and was just empty at the time.
 
chaos386 said:
And what's wrong with that? If there truly is no other evidence that the driver/passengers own or traffic drugs, why should they be prosecuted and sentenced to jail? Also, the article claims that the law wouldn't be applicable in the above case, anyway, since an intent to hide drugs in the compartment must be shown. With a lack of other evidence, the driver could make a reasonable case that the compartment is for hiding a gun or non-drug valuables and was just empty at the time.
Click to expand...
First things first, just because I try to explain the reasoning behind this, does not mean I am in favour of it. I am not.

But just for the arguments sake ... one will have trouble arguing that for example a compartment INSIDE the filled fuel tank is for any other purpose than smuggling. `cause you know, always keep your valueables or guns inside a petrol filled box, that?s what they teach at school ;)

Joint%20press%20release%20pic4.jpg
 
Last edited:
Interrobang said:
First things first, just because I try to explain the reasoning behind this, does not mean I am in favour of it. I am not.
Click to expand...

No worries, man. Just attacking the reasoning, not you. :)

Interrobang said:
But just for the arguments sake ... one will have trouble arguing that for example a compartment INSIDE the filled fuel tank is for any other purpose than smuggling. `cause you know, always keep your valueables or guns inside a petrol filled box, that?s what they teach at school ;)
Click to expand...

Even in that case, I think it would come down to how good the defendant's lawyer is. The defendant doesn't have to prove they didn't have intent, it's the prosecution that has to prove that they did, and ability doesn't equal intent. The argument that "it couldn't possibly be used for anything except for drugs" could be countered by a single alternative use (wanted to reduce the size of the fuel tank to force the driver to use less fuel, and made the empty space accessible to fix leaks).

It seems far more likely to me that the prosecutor would have some evidence besides the car itself that proves intent, and that it would be used for direct charges of drug trafficking, as well as for this law. That's why I think it's meant to be used to increase sentences, rather than an offense on its own. Even for the builders, if they knew what it was being used for, I'm sure aiding in an illegal act was already illegal before this law.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top