One thing I have noticed in the Boston situation, and also the earlier one in California a few months back are the police going door to door conducting searches of peoples homes. In these circumstances are warrants not required? Seems a bit odd.
Police Searching Homes
- Thread starter 44-henry
- Start date
- Status
In Boston they are actively pursuing one of the suspected perpetrators of the Boston Marathon bombing. There has been at least one gunfight. One MIT police officer has been killed. Another police officer has been wounded. The other suspect has been killed.
The remaining suspect is reasonably believed to be armed and may have explosives.
Please remember that the Fourth Amendment protects us against unreasonable search and seizure. Sometimes, under exigent circumstances, action might need to be taken with the understanding that the reasonableness of that action might have to be justified later on. And in general, a warrant is not required when in hot pursuit.
The remaining suspect is reasonably believed to be armed and may have explosives.
Please remember that the Fourth Amendment protects us against unreasonable search and seizure. Sometimes, under exigent circumstances, action might need to be taken with the understanding that the reasonableness of that action might have to be justified later on. And in general, a warrant is not required when in hot pursuit.
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
Searches like this are conducted voluntarily. "Knock, knock...Good morning Ma'am, I'm officer Peabody of the BPD. We'd like to take a look around your property to make sure no one has snuck in to hide out here..."
You have the right to say, "(No one has entered here and) I don't wish to have you enter my property. Have a nice day."
If they want to force the issue, they'll need a search warrant. (Probably...though specifics vary.)
But far and away MOST folks just say "SURE! Go right ahead!"
You have the right to say, "(No one has entered here and) I don't wish to have you enter my property. Have a nice day."
If they want to force the issue, they'll need a search warrant. (Probably...though specifics vary.)
But far and away MOST folks just say "SURE! Go right ahead!"
beatledog7
Member
Sure, search the exterior grounds. I'd know if anyone had entered the house, so an interior search is unwarranted (both in the legal and practical sense).
bikerdoc
Moderator In Memoriam
There is a judge on scene if a warrant is needed.
MedWheeler
Member
They are only searching those homes at which consent is given. It's more like Sam said. Officers are making contact (when possible) with residents, and have been advised to interpret, to the best of their abilities, body language, voice tone and inflection, and other factors of those with whom they do make contact to try to determine whether or not the suspect may be present against the resident's will (i.e., holding other family members hostage.)
They are not forcing their way routinely into any homes, whether or not an answer is received at the door.
They are not forcing their way routinely into any homes, whether or not an answer is received at the door.
Cosmoline
Member
There are a lot of rules about hot pursuit. But at this point I don't think they're going to be arresting anyone for a bong found in a kitchen. They have a very limited focus at the moment and no time to be rounding up people for minor infractions.
Onward Allusion
Member
I was thinking of the same question. So, what if some schmuck lets the cops in to do a search and he's in the middle of cleaning his AR/AK's or just have his toys out??? I can't imagine a good outcome for the guy consenting to a search. At the very least, the schmuck will be tied up for hours if not days or weeks trying to convince the authorities that he's a harmless gun collector/sportsman.
So, to all you boys and girls out there - think three times before letting cops into your home without a warrant.
So, to all you boys and girls out there - think three times before letting cops into your home without a warrant.
SabbathWolf
member
Yep. I agree.
And where do you draw the line anyways?
I've lived in some large cities where cops were searching for multiple people for different crimes every single day.
Should I have just left my front door open with a big sign that said:
"Warrantless Searches Welcome" "Please Come Right In"
lol....
Arkansas Paul
Member
Frank has it right in the 2nd post. No Court would deem this unreasonable. And of course, if the searches are voluntary as has been suspected by other posters, it wouldn't matter.
Second, they are not searching for incriminating evidence against the homeowners. If they walk in and a guy is sitting in front of his TV, watching the news coverage while smoking pot and eating cheetos, they're not going to bother him.
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
Are you serious? You know any evidence a police officer sees that a law is being broken, when they have been invited into your home, is perfectly admissible as evidence against you.
If you think some LEOs would turn a blind eye to drugs or an unregistered weapon or some other potential felony ... well, you may be right. Some might. But that's not a chance in hell I'd ever want to take.
Shadow 7D
Member
Remember, when you let them in, YOU WAIVE you protection...
so the bong, is admissible, even if that's not what they entered for.
so the bong, is admissible, even if that's not what they entered for.
TheSaint
Member
According to the news, the police are sending out robocalls to inform those neighborhoods in which searches are ongoing. I have yet to hear of the police forcing their way into any home without consent. If the homeowner gives consent, there's no reason why they can't check the home out.
TheSaint
Member
This whole situation is developing so fast, one wonders how many warrants are being issued for non-compliance. Personally, given that this suspect is armed with explosives, even though I'm not normally a favor of the police searching my property, I'd rather be safe than sorry and clear out and let the SWAT teams sweep it.
I work from home most days. If an event such as this were happening around me I would know if there was someone in my house that should not be. That being said they can look around outside all they want... my property view is unobstructed and I have no fences or gates. All my doors are shut and locked, and I usually carry while home. There's no reason for them to come in.
Highland Ranger
Member
I sympathize with the situation but I'm with the "you need a warrant" team.
In my case between the dogs and other measures, there's no one here who isn't supposed to be.
In my case between the dogs and other measures, there's no one here who isn't supposed to be.
RetiredUSNChief
Member
If you refuse entry and they enter anyway, then you haven't waived any of your rights. The determination of "probable cause" by the officers on the scene dictate whether or not they can enter without a warrant. Gathering evidence not related to what they're looking for if their entry doesn't meet "probable cause" means it's inadmissable. That's a court decision, though.
At this point in time, though, warrants ain't gonna be a problem if they really think they need to check. A judge is likely on call round the clock for this, likely more than one to cover this. Unless it's really something that obviously meets "probable cause", likely they'll fall back on a judge while keeping watch on wherever they want to search to make sure nobody leaves.
TheSaint
Member
I would posit that the average THR'er is more security aware than your average Bostonian. All it takes is one sleeping home owner with no security system, no dogs, no firearms, etc. to hide in a subfloor or crawlspace, or hold a family hostage inside of a house while instructing the homeowner to answer the door to police and say everything is "all clear". Most people have poor situation awareness, which is something to keep in mind. By all means, those who are security aware should refuse a police entry if they have reason to believe their property is in lockdown and they've verified it themselves. As a group, both law enforcement and civilians need to flush this guy(s) out.
Xelera
Member
Consider the position of the police.
Scenario 1: bad guy is in your house against your will, and tells you to send the cops on their merry way when they knock or you/loved ones are going to die. - You tell the cops to leave.
Scenario 2: bad guy is in your house and you are aiding/abetting him (he did magically disappear in said neighborhood rather easily). - You tell the cops to leave.
Scenario 3: Bad guy is not in your house, you believe in personal freedom and liberty, and believe that the cops cannot search your house reasonably in this case. - You tell the cops to leave.
A cop can search you and your vehicle incident to an arrest, no warrant required. In many jurisdictions, they can search your person, no warrant, simply as procedure if they are detaining you for questioning at the scene, even with the intent to release you after talking to you. Most states give the cops reasonable protection in situations such as these, and you can sue all you want later, refuse all you want at the time, but it will get you nowhere.
Now throw a terrorist in the mix who has shot and killed a cop, killed innocent civilians, mamed/injured hundreds, is armed and dangerous, and the cops are on edge, ill-humored, probably haven't slept in 24-48 hours and they won't be too accomodating when you constitution up on them, given the 2/3 scenarios above meaning the bad guy is in the house.
Not saying you have to like or agree with it, but that's the political environment we live in today, for better or worse. And like the other posters said, if they are on a swat team man hunt with DHS and all manner of feds, they aren't going to stop to write you a ticket for a half-smoked joint on the counter.
Having your guns out will require a bit more explaining, and I would make sure that the cops knew I was cooperating with them when they wanted to search, would grant them permission to do so (since they would get it anyways) and I would indicate that I had my firearms out for mine and my family's protection given the current violent man-hunt underway, tell them what to expect and where in the house, and make sure no family member was armed or handling a weapon when they searched.
To me, that is the best you can make of a situation that is bad all around.
Scenario 1: bad guy is in your house against your will, and tells you to send the cops on their merry way when they knock or you/loved ones are going to die. - You tell the cops to leave.
Scenario 2: bad guy is in your house and you are aiding/abetting him (he did magically disappear in said neighborhood rather easily). - You tell the cops to leave.
Scenario 3: Bad guy is not in your house, you believe in personal freedom and liberty, and believe that the cops cannot search your house reasonably in this case. - You tell the cops to leave.
A cop can search you and your vehicle incident to an arrest, no warrant required. In many jurisdictions, they can search your person, no warrant, simply as procedure if they are detaining you for questioning at the scene, even with the intent to release you after talking to you. Most states give the cops reasonable protection in situations such as these, and you can sue all you want later, refuse all you want at the time, but it will get you nowhere.
Now throw a terrorist in the mix who has shot and killed a cop, killed innocent civilians, mamed/injured hundreds, is armed and dangerous, and the cops are on edge, ill-humored, probably haven't slept in 24-48 hours and they won't be too accomodating when you constitution up on them, given the 2/3 scenarios above meaning the bad guy is in the house.
Not saying you have to like or agree with it, but that's the political environment we live in today, for better or worse. And like the other posters said, if they are on a swat team man hunt with DHS and all manner of feds, they aren't going to stop to write you a ticket for a half-smoked joint on the counter.
Having your guns out will require a bit more explaining, and I would make sure that the cops knew I was cooperating with them when they wanted to search, would grant them permission to do so (since they would get it anyways) and I would indicate that I had my firearms out for mine and my family's protection given the current violent man-hunt underway, tell them what to expect and where in the house, and make sure no family member was armed or handling a weapon when they searched.
To me, that is the best you can make of a situation that is bad all around.
zxcvbob
Member
Do you really think that's a 2/3 probability?
Of course you allow them to search, but make sure it on the record as being without your consent.
Shadow 7D
Member
NO....
Terry Stop, the cop MUST be able to articulate that you posed a risk AND had a weapon/ablity to harm him.... NO your rights are STILL intact
You say no, they enter anyways, your rights intact
You say no, they arrest you and enter, its in court, your rights in tact and...
you say no, they get a warrant, ONLY ITEMS ON THE WARRANT are admissible...
you say, "yes officer" EVERYTHING IS FAIR GAME
clutch
Contributing Member
I'm against searches on principle. I've thought about this a lot though, there could be times when clearing an area quickly could save someone or many.
So when the cop comes to your door or stops your car and asks to search it, can you ask, what are you looking for and then give a limited permission to search for only that? Can a cop make a such deal with you?
So when the cop comes to your door or stops your car and asks to search it, can you ask, what are you looking for and then give a limited permission to search for only that? Can a cop make a such deal with you?
Blackbeard
Member
No such thing as limited permission. You let them in, anything is fair game. He can offer the deal but he doesn't have to keep to it, and anything he finds is admissible.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
