Ruling Allows Evidence Seized in Unannounced Searches

[JFortune]

Ruling Allows Evidence Seized in Unannounced Searches

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS



Published: June 15, 2006
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that police can use evidence collected with a warrant even if officers fail to knock before rushing into a home.
Justice Samuel Alito broke a 4-4 tie in siding with Detroit police, who called out their presence at a man's door then went inside three seconds to five seconds later.
The case had tested previous court rulings that police armed with warrants generally must knock and announce themselves or they run afoul of the Constitution's Fourth Amendment ban on unreasonable searches.
Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for the majority, said "whether that preliminary misstep had occurred or not, the police would have executed the warrant they had obtained, and would have discovered the gun and drugs inside the house."
The court did not say how long police officers must wait after knocking before they enter a home to execute a search warrant.
But suppressing evidence is too high of a penalty, Scalia said, for errors in police searches.
The outcome might have been different if Justice Sandra Day O'Connor was still on the bench. She seemed ready, when the case was first argued in January, to rule in favor Booker Hudson, whose house was searched in 1998.
She retired before the case was decided, and a new argument was held so Alito could participate in deliberations.
Hudson's lawyers argued that evidence against him was connected to the improper search and could not be used against him.
Scalia said that a victory for Hudson would have given "a get-out-of-jail-free card" to him and others.

[Randy J.]

Bush's new justice already in action, taking away rights - who would of known

[The Professor]

this is one step closer to Big Brother and a police state... I can't tell you the number of times i have said that during this administration... this is a scary-as-hell doctrine that should not be overlooked...

the idea is NOT that a criminal should be protected, but that the warrant now trumps "innocent until proven guilty"... he who grants the warrant is destroying due process...

be worried, guys... be worried...

[Randy J.]

the idea is NOT that a criminal should be protected, but that the warrant now trumps "innocent until proven guilty"... he who grants the warrant is destroying due process...

excellent point

[auralassassin]

If there is a perceived threat of Weapons in the house(and damn... sure enough) they don't have to knock. They already did more than required in announcing themselves--because they were going there searching for weapons.

Assume for a second that they'd have waited another minute and given the guy time to load/fire/hide/etc his weapon? You could have dead police and a dead suspect. They did the right thing. And I think it's fucking hilarious that this is Big Brother action, of ALL things they do--THIS is it?

Or how about how TERRIBLY unfair our judicial system is... yet we basically have a split vote on every single issue... seems pretty damn close to me. And to say that it was Alito that broke the tie? What about the other people on the court who voted the same as he did? Spinsters sure do have a way of playing you fools like puppets and getting you fired up and crying conspiracy. They know damn well that Democrats will never win on terrorism or defense, and they know none of us agree on any single issues... don't be so obvious, boys. Karl Rove will continue to own us as long as we allow him to.

[J. Phoenix]

There was a black man in Tonganoxie not too many years ago who was shot in his bedroom by the SWAT Team that came to serve a warrant...on a meth lab...across the street.

They got the address wrong. The family swears they never called out Police, that they simply busted the door, ran in, yelling and shouting.

The victim was in his bedroom, thought someone had busted into his house, got his shotgun, had enough time to open the door of his bedroom, and they shot him to death. (There is a debate concerning whether he had words with any police officers; family says no, police say he refused to stand down)

Despite the fact the warrant was made out for the wrong address, despite the fact that the meth heads ran and were never caught, despite numerous testimonies from family and witnesses in the neighborhood that the SWAT Team did not in fact announce their presence or attempt to knock on the door, no action was taken against any member of the SWAT Team.

Rationale in court? A roach was found on an ashtray in the man's room. Therefore, the man was in fact engaged in illegal activity despite not being the illegal activity the warrant was signed out for.

Here's my 2 cents on the whole subject: We're all fucked. We don't understand the laws that exist currently, nor the reasons those laws were created to protect us from our Government. As they eliminate these laws that we were unaware of to begin with, they gain more and more ability to control and invade our lives without question or protest.
Because of this, and because there is no widespread protest or attempt to rectify the removal of these laws, you will learn why 200 years ago, people came up with ways to protect themselves from those with the power firsthand.
May God and our grandchildren have Mercy on our Souls.

[JFortune]

There was a black man in Tonganoxie not too many years ago who was shot in his bedroom by the SWAT Team that came to serve a warrant...on a meth lab...across the street.

They got the address wrong. The family swears they never called out Police, that they simply busted the door, ran in, yelling and shouting.

The victim was in his bedroom, thought someone had busted into his house, got his shotgun, had enough time to open the door of his bedroom, and they shot him to death. (There is a debate concerning whether he had words with any police officers; family says no, police say he refused to stand down)

Despite the fact the warrant was made out for the wrong address, despite the fact that the meth heads ran and were never caught, despite numerous testimonies from family and witnesses in the neighborhood that the SWAT Team did not in fact announce their presence or attempt to knock on the door, no action was taken against any member of the SWAT Team.

Rationale in court? A roach was found on an ashtray in the man's room. Therefore, the man was in fact engaged in illegal activity despite not being the illegal activity the warrant was signed out for.

Here's my 2 cents on the whole subject: We're all fucked. We don't understand the laws that exist currently, nor the reasons those laws were created to protect us from our Government. As they eliminate these laws that we were unaware of to begin with, they gain more and more ability to control and invade our lives without question or protest.
Because of this, and because there is no widespread protest or attempt to rectify the removal of these laws, you will learn why 200 years ago, people came up with ways to protect themselves from those with the power firsthand.
May God and our grandchildren have Mercy on our Souls.

WELL PUT.

[Cyrus Ramsey]

Nice one J, I agree.

[Randy J.]

Its when we they take the right to bear arms that we should truely be worried. That is one of the first actions Hitler took when taking over Germany.

[uncle_jessie]

Did my post get deleted?

[The Professor]

haha... censorship sucks, doesn't it... you right winger!!!!








just kidding... i don't see it... if it was really long, think if you possibly could have been logged out before it was posted... that has happened to me on several occasions...

[Cyrus Ramsey]

Its when we they take the right to bear arms that we should truely be worried. That is one of the first actions Hitler took when taking over Germany.

he speaks the truth. And unfortunatly the right to bear arms has been under some serious pressure for a long time now. Although I hate to admit it, its at least one thing that the NRA has been good for.

[uncle_jessie]

haha... censorship sucks, doesn't it... you right winger!!!!


LOL that's cool man. I did get kinda carried away if you all did delete it. I just can't stand it some times man. And I'm not a right winger....don't let the sig fool you =) I just always get a better reaction from ragging Liberals then Conservatives. I always say "Republicans have bad ideas while Democrats have no ideas." That's why I've been a registered Libertarian since I was 18. Unlike most people out there my age I was able to listen to what both sides had to say....determine they are both full of shit....and make my own decisions.

But basically what I said was that as long as the cops yell "POLICE!!" 3 to 5 seconds before they kick down a door....what's the big deal? So they didn't knock...big woop. They clearly announced who it was. How many times have you watched a police raid on TV like on Cops or something and right before they bust down the door they are screaming POLICE really loud? I can't recall a time I did not see that happen. So in my eyes this isn't really that big of a deal. The only problem I would have is if the judge is handing out warrants like they are candy without really having enough evidence to do so. That's not a judge...that's an activist. But what probably got my post deleted, if it was in fact deleted, was the comment I made that some of you guys are so paranoid you are starting to remind me of my meth-head sister =) She's got some crazy stuff to say about the governemtn...haha.

[J. Phoenix]

I may be paranoid, but its only because I feel like we're a hop, skip, and a jump away from having the National Guard posted up with M-16's at every toll booth on the Interstate, and for being arrested for making innocent posts like this to a webboard.

Yes, on COPS you will always see the police yell "Police!" before they knock down the door--because they are on camera. You may have noticed the extremely low frequency of episodes of COPS where they cops scratch their heads and go, "well, shucks... I guess the bad guy got away this time..." That's because its called "TV". Its edited, its sanitized, and I might add its part of Rupert Murdoch's Empire of Proper Propaganda.

However, COPS does reveal something I find extremely relevant: the general attitude of police officers to the general public they encounter. It seems anymore that the police feel at odds with the general public. 8 times out of 10, the encounter you see between an officer of the law and a citizen is a snap-judgement impolite yelling match, probably ending in handcuffs. Now, this may be because of the fact that COPS doesn't show boring video of a friendly exchange, but I think the way in which I see police dealing with 80% of the situations they encounter may have some relevance.

I didn't notice it until going to archive.org and watching video of cops back in the 40's and 50's. Even during an altercation, or a tense situation, the police said, "Sir", "Ma'am" and were generally polite to the point they couldn't be anymore. There was a seeming mutual respect on both sides. I feel that police nowadays are too isolated in their cars, too innundated with the idea that everyone is a potential suspect, that everyone is out to get them.

I think that breaking down a person's door is something to be done only in extreme situations, with planning and fore-thought throughout. I think the real problem is that the police are more than happy to break down a door instead of walking a beat in the same neighborhood.

I think there's a better way, and the first step is to get cops out of cars, and get them walking the beat, learning their neighborhood, getting to know the people that live there...as opposed to jumping out of a black van in shock-trooper gear and busting into a place that may or may not actually be where they thought they were supposed to be.

The militarization of the police is most disconcerting. It should interest and bother all of you, as it does me. There are rules set in place in our Constitution, and our Bill of Rights separating the Police (state, city, and sheriffs), The National Guard (state militias), and the regular Army (National Defense). In case you haven't noticed, the lines are blurring more and more in our lifetimes. SWAT teams have the same gear you can find in the Army and the National Guard. The National Guard is mostly overseas right now in a very sandy place...and pardon me if I'm wrong, but aren't parts of Louisiana still under Martial Law with the Army posted in civilian areas?

These divisions were made for a reason. We separated the forces to keep the power out of the hands of the Executive branch. We set up rules about how and when a person could be searched, or their property seized. We set up rules that the military would not take over civilian housing. However, the breakdown began to happen around the same time Nixon declared a never-ending "War On Drugs". The War on Drugs has funded SWAT operations, changed the role of the Police, helped to excuse abuse of search and seizure laws in the names of a scourge that cannot be eliminated...which somehow only grows as you try to fight against it...

Is it safe to watch this happen and remain silent because you do not use drugs and therefore don't feel threatened? Is it safe to watch this happen because you do use drugs and already feel threatened?

As for the right to bear arms... I've been watching military videos for years, and the stuff from Afganistan and Iraq is un-real. I would say that you cannot fuck with the US military from what I have seen. I think we have long been past the point at which the citizens of this country could rise up and take back the power with weaponry.

In fact, just assessing our non-lethal arsenal is pretty impressive. We have weapons that will boil the water in your skin up--it won't kill you, but you'll want to get out of the way of the beam quickly http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_Denial_System We have sound cannons that can deafen you permanently http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_range_acoustic_device and devices that will hit you with a small amount of plasma, causing brief pain, sound bursts, and disorientation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulsed_Energy_Projectile . We have light guns which will render you temporarily (permanently?) blind http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_dazzler also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personnel_Halting_and_Stimulation_Response_rifle .

We've been using rubber bullets for years, 10 lb. bean bags fired with the speed of a bullet, forms of mace and pepper spray for a long time, water cannons, and so forth... but assuming you could even organize a revolution after the deal is sealed, I don't think you're going to have very far to get before you're put into a similar place to Guantanamo Bay for "dissidence".