A rather unusual trial has ended in a Nevada County courtroom. District Attorney Cliff Newell says 46-year-old Bradley Feinman, from Lakeport, and his 20-year-old son, Vincent, from Texas, were coming into California on westbound I-80, earlier this year, at the ag inspection station near Truckee…
click to listen to Cliff Newell
Law enforcement officers were called in. But Newell says the Feinman’s still wouldn’t cooperate, despite repeated orders. Officers finally had to break windows to force them out of the vehicle. They were charged with three misdemeanor counts: resisting arrest, by threat of force…not following a law enforcement order…and failing to comply with the ag inspection. Newell says there was actually nothing in the vehicle and it appeared the Feinman’s were merely trying to make an anti-government statement…
click to listen to Cliff Newell
Newell says Bradley Feinman was convicted on all three counts and has been sentenced to 12 days in the county jail and 30 hours of community service. Vincent Feinman was convicted only of the resisting arrest charge and was sentenced to 4 days in jail and 20 hours of community service.
What a shame, for him to be convicted on this proves it's too late.
Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. Benjamin Franklin
I want it on the record that what DA Cliff Newell said in this article is incorrect and a complete fabrication:
1. I drove through the Ag Inspection station one (1) time, and ONLY 1 time on the night that this occurred. Why would DA Newell lie and make the statement that I drove through multiple times on the same night? Because he wants to portray me as someone who was looking for attention and wanted to make a statement. This was not the case. I was simply standing up for my rights as protected by the 4th Amendment of the Constitution. I believe he reviewed my YouTube channel and viewed an earlier video where we had traveled through the Ag Station on a previous out of state visit several months prior, and made the mistake of assuming it was the same night. Clearly it wasn't and again it shows the DA is not interested in the facts.
2. I never once claimed to be a "sovereign citizen" or said that I was not subject to the laws of the state of California. Watch the entire video and see for yourself. It's all on the record and every second of our incident was video recorded up until they arrested me and my two sons. Again, DA Newell is attempting to categorize me as an extremist in order to further his false position. I did say that the Constitution protects our rights to be free from warrantless searches, and that I'd be more than happy to let them search me and my vehicle if they would produce a legal warrant.
Please open your eyes and see that we are losing our liberties a little more every day. You must stand up for your rights as protected by the Constitution, or they will soon all be lost.
What an idiot and terrible father. This wannabe lawyer thinks he knows the law (clearly doesn't). Why not try going to law school? All the while his ignorance gets his kid taken away by CPS. I feel sorry for the kid.
There is a distinct difference between an inspection and a search. Inspections are determined solely for the detection of bugs that affect the eco system of a bulk food producing state and do not lead to forfeiture of life limb or property. Its acknowledged it's quite possible for an accidental quarantine to happen. As long as you allow an inspection the burden of any infestation is with the food and ag boys. So ok if you refuse an inspection and stand on the 4th amendment principle then as part of your insurance be prepared to help pay for pest control .
First off, It would be completely impossible to produce a search warrant for every vehicle that passes through an Agricultural Inspection Station.
These inspection stations exist for good reason. California produces 40% of the Nations fresh fruits and 33% of the Nations fresh vegetables. Without the Ag Inspection Stations, California's produce could be jeopardized.
Inspection of Agriculture of one conveyance is in fact a law, and is not unreasonable to enforce as such.
Mr. Bradley Feinman acted unreasonable, and got both himself and his son arrested.
Feinman hasn’t a clue. We SAW the video. If you want to challenge a law do it IN COURT. The officers were easy on you.
This little fuss cost this fool a cost of a windows replacement, a tow,impound fees,a fine ,and jail time,,he acted inappropriately for the good of all who depend on agriculture, and to teach his kid to disobey authorities was wrong, this idiot should of lost his license IF HE EVEN HAD ONE
If I were the prosecutor I would have left the felony charges in place.I think the lady inspector might have been wrong. Try it once more Brad.
Juan C Alvarez
Bradley, I say this with the utmost respect and straight from the heart... you are an absolute moron and your children should not have to pay for your ignorance.
Some of the most professional, personal, and kind officers I've ever see in one of these videos.
Feinman was a complete moron. You MUST produce your driving credentials when asked when driving. Driving isn't a RIGHT. Nevermind the Ag inspection violation. Idiot.
So they are making you prove your innocence before they let you go? You are presumed to be guilty? The totalitarian tiptoe winds down a long road. Serfdom is at the end of that road. In Nazi Germany authorities would stop random people and ask to see their papers/identification. They were harassing the citizenry, fishing for jews. Here in California they harass the citizenry, fishing for plants and produce.
Do any of you know what the Bill of Rights is?
It's a part of the constitution. It's a list of things that the government cannot do to the citizens. It is there to protect freedom and defend against subjugation.
In that bill of rights is the 4th amendment which protects citizens from unwarranted searches and seizures. There may be laws that say the Neanderthals at the inspection station can inspect your car, but to the extent that they constitute a warrantless search they are unconstitutional.
'Hey random person I don't know, open your doors so we can look inside without a warrant' is tantamount to an illegal search.
Trying to cling to some semantic argument that an 'inspection' is different than a 'search' is irrelevant when the 'inspection' literally involves the search (and potential seizure) of someone's property. If the inspection constitutes an illegal search, it's still an illegal search, regardless of the language of the law that purports to permit it.
The people saying that it is a law and that makes if final don't seem to realize that unconstitutional laws are challenged and struck down by the judicial branch all the time. The fact that it's a law doesn't make it any more or less constitutional. Please stop with the 'it's a law' argument.
The government works for the people, not the other way around. We are not their property. Those officers swore an oath to uphold the constitution, and here they are trotting all over it.
There is a reason California is the only state that has these 'inspection stations'; its because they are unconstitutional and California doesn't care about your rights or your freedom. California also has the most homeless per capita and the greatest inequality. Crime and drug use are so rampant convenience stores serve candy bars through bullet proof glass and don't offer public restrooms.
For all of you who think that this is about protecting the agriculture, just know that there's probably 50 places you can drive across the border where there isn't an agriculture inspection station, many of which you could drive a tractor trailer through. Furthermore they often close the inspection station down during the night and just let anybody drive through, on holidays they do the same thing. I guess Japanese beetles take off on holidays too?
As a system designed to keep any foreign pests out of California, it is completely INEFFECTUAL. As a system designed to get people conditioned to stopping and answering to a uniformed Authority, it is incredibly EFFECTUAL.
Remember in Nazi Germany you had to carry papers to prove you weren't a jew? In California you have to stop and open your trunk to prove you aren't a smuggler.
All the people calling this guy a moron that are just so willing to give up their freedom, don't realize that this guy is standing up for all of us. What he did was incredibly selfless; he was fighting to set a precedent and to protect all of our freedoms.
He underestimated the degree to which California has been compromised by statists and authoritarians, but the man is a patriot, a champion of the constitution, and a defender of freedom.
So many people shed their blood and gave their lives for us to enjoy the freedoms that you people just hand over frivolously. It is truly sad to see so many Americans forget what it means to be American.
Constitutionalists never have a clue how the law really works. They’re some of the most ignorant people I have ever met.
Proof people think they know the law but are totally clueless. And a father bringing kids up like he is is why this country is going down the tubes.
Reply to Anthony Perron
So the people who gave their lives for the freedom of others is acceptable, yet agreeing to an agricultural inspection (ineffective as it may be) to protect the agricultural sector and peoples freedom to expect good food production and supply is not acceptable.
How is giving up ones life for the freedoms of others good and giving up ones time for an inspection for the freedoms of others not good?
Freedoms are not absolute and come with consequences and responsibilities, if you believe in the rights and good for all people.
Absolute freedoms are the expectation of selfish people.
The actual problem is when the inspector finds something illegal (that is not agriculture) he can and probably will call the police who will then pull you over down the road. So, the reality is you are being searched.
If you want to protect the constitution, make sure you understand it. Bending the rules to suit your needs is not part of it, and wasting the time of the people withing the AG checkpoint is crazy selfish. Consider other people for a half second before you act like a jackass in front of your kid. The inspection is to protect EVERYONE else in California, not to steal your rights. Stop being so shitty...
The CA legislature wrote AG inspection law and the governor executed it. Later, the California Supreme Court and federal courts enforced it. It’s the law, and Mr Feinman’s ignorance of the law is not an excuse to not follow the rules. If Feinman wants the law changed, he needs to take it up with the legislator. In the end, the driver was negligent.