Lawyers, Legal Officials, Do you think this person have a good case/argument???

Storyline:

My friend was driving down the street and then he pulled up in a random driveway a couple houses up from a corner store during approximately 2000 hours. In the next 3 mintues or so, a guy from the corner store walks out, go towards my friends car, opens and sits inside the car. And, within 10 mintues, a group of two officers in plain clothes walks up to my friend's car and points a gun at him and orders him to get out the car and lie on the ground. My friend and his friend does as told and after they had been arested without being read their miranda rights; the officers then search the car and finds 2 pounds of marijuana in the back seat, not exactly in plain view. Question is:
Do you think that the officers can just legally arest my friend without legally detaining him for questions? Can they do that without probable cause? Do you think he has a good argument for that? also, what is a non-custodial Search?

Ps. both the defendents were not under survelence.

Yes, because police can do a search incidental to an arrest (and for a car, they can see if there are weapons within reach of the two individuals who were in the car so the back seat is perfectly reasonable to search).

Miranda rights are not required to be read unless the officers were questioning the friend.

Your scenario said they had been arrested (well, it was spelled "arested").

1. To detain a person, it only requires reasonable suspicion. To arrest a person requires probable cause.

2. The "random driveway" could be the drug dealers house which was under surveillance;

3. Assuming they had not been arrested, but merely detained, the police could still have searched areas which were capable of hiding a weapon and within reach of the suspects (so basically the entire car, except the trunk).

no- = lawyer time

what the officers did was completely legal