Illegal Search and Seizure

If you are real worried, I'd download some photorec software and see if they are truly wiped. They probably aren't. I did a photorec on my computer acouple days ago and found MAD shit. Not sure they'd go to all that trouble though. Better safe than sorry.
 
HydroDawg421 said:
Still better than being busted with a grow. The cops have to prove he was driving the car, I don't know if following a trail of coolant to a residence is enough to hold up in court. Like I said. He needs to sell everything he has, max out his credit cards and beg, borrow and steal to get a good lawyer. Even if he beats it, it will cost him everything he has and life as he knows it will cease to exist. I feel for him!
Click to expand...

Not unless we can get marijuana completely legalized and he is granted amnesty :D
 
You american pig , bend over n take a swift us of a butt fucking like the rest of em , im so glad i dont live in america the land of slavery , you got butt fucked now take it like a man
 
Balzac89 said:
The Warrant was only for his arrest not for the premises. The accident happened months ago. They just served the warrant.


The cop had probable cause when he smelled it, but he had already entered the dwelling.(Illegally)
Click to expand...

If they have a warrant, and they believe he was inside, it is perfectly legal. Instead of trying to figure this out now, he should have thought about it before the DUI, hit and run, to the grow house, and staying there for months with a warrant out.

It sucks all the same, though.
 
massah said:
But doesn't someone having an arrest warrant kinda trump the "search" since they were already there to arrest the guy for the warrant?
Click to expand...

Even if the cops knew for a fact he was there they would need another warrant to enter the house. They cannot walk into a house w/o exigent circumstances or a warrant to enter the premises.
 
You are missing the main point. They had a warrant for his arrest. If they believe he is home they can enter the residence to arrest him. If during the course of securing him they discover other illicit activity it will usually hold up in court. IF they door would have been locked and they busted it down I think it would be thrown out quickly.

The outcome of this will depend on how well his lawyer argues in court and whether or not the Judge is in a good mood.
 
Balzac89 said:
Even if the cops knew for a fact he was there they would need another warrant to enter the house. They cannot walk into a house w/o exigent circumstances or a warrant to enter the premises.
Click to expand...

Hmm...that just doesn't seem right...that would mean any criminal could run from the cops to their own house run inside and lock the door and stick their tongue out at them through the window...
 
the whole smelling weed thing really needs to stop...i'd fight that shit in court...is it illegal to burn marijuana scented incense? Nope...but if a cop comes to your door and you have some burning and its pretty strong that gives them the right to break your door down? Fuck that....
 
massah said:
Hmm...that just doesn't seem right...that would mean any criminal could run from the cops to their own house run inside and lock the door and stick their tongue out at them through the window...
Click to expand...

I have a B.A.in Political Science with a minor in Criminal Justice.
 
Balzac89 said:
He just drove back home. I have no idea I guess he figured since no one saw it(night) he could just forget it. But radiator fluid up to his house and a damaged car in his driveway.
Click to expand...

Which would give them evidence of him being a "Familiar" to the house/apt. Mix that with the warrant, and the smell. If it were California, where Hit and Run is a Felony, they would have authority to break the door down for fugitive recovery! (Felonious)
 
I personally believe that this is open and closed Illegal Search and Seizure. If he gets a good lawyer the lawyer can get all evidence obtained from the illegal search thrown out and dismissal of the majority of charges
 
From what i've read, police are perfectly within their powers to enter a house to arrest the person stated in the arrest warrant.

Under the Tolbert rule, it even appears they have the power to enter say your house, even if the warrant is for him, although this is only in certain circumstances. As said though, if the police had a warrant for his arrest and reason to beleive he was in the building, they had the power to enter. as to searching, the police only have the power to search the area within reach of the detainee (in case there are knives, guns etc) but no further.
 
However, the Justices have long found themselves embroiled in argument about the scope of the search incident to arrest as it extends beyond the person to the area in which the person is arrested, most commonly either his premises or his vehicle. Certain early cases went both ways on the basis of some fine distinctions,[SUP]219[/SUP] but in Harris v. United States,[SUP]220[/SUP] the Court approved a search of a four-room apartment pursuant to an arrest under warrant for one crime and in which the search turned up evidence of another crime. A year later, in Trupiano v. United States,[SUP]221[/SUP] a raid on a distillery resulted in the arrest of a man found on the premises and a seizure of the equipment; the Court reversed the conviction because the officers had had time to obtain a search warrant and had not done so. "A search or seizure without a warrant as an incident to a lawful arrest has always been considered to be a strictly limited right. It grows out of the inherent necessities of the situation at the time of the arrest. But there must be something more in the way of necessity than merely a lawful arrest."[SUP]222[/SUP] This decision was overruled in United States v. Rabinowitz,[SUP]223[/SUP] in which officers arrested defendant in his one-room office pursuant to an arrest warrant and proceeded to search the room completely. The Court observed that the issue was not whether the officers had the time and opportunity to obtain a search warrant but whether the search incident to arrest was reasonable. ThoughRabinowitz referred to searches of the area within the arrestee's "immediate control,"[SUP]224[/SUP] it provided no standard by which this area was to be determined, and extensive searches were permitted under the rule.[SUP]225[/SUP]
http://law.onecle.com/constitution/amendment-04/14-search-incident-to-arrest.html
 
Yes, it does here in Michigan. Around here there was a home divided into flats. Everyone were friends and they left their doors unlocked. The courts said that the interior doors left unlocked meant that the entire building became one unit.

Don't know what happened on appeal.
Balzac89 said:
The doors weren't locked, but that doesn't matter.
Click to expand...
 
Considering that you don't seem entirely sure on what the legal position of this whole thing is, i'd take a second to find out what it really means before saying that unlocked doors don't mean anything. Maybe it doesn't matter, maybe it makes all the difference.

As it is though, if the police have an arrest warrant, they have power of entry to his house forced or otherwise.

Not much more i can add to this but well, your friend made some pretty dumb mistakes has to be said.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top