- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Supreme Court expands police authority to search homes
Posted on 2/26/14 at 9:53 am
Posted on 2/26/14 at 9:53 am
LINK
quote:
WASHINGTON — Police officers may enter and search a home without a warrant as long as one occupant consents, even if another resident has previously objected, the Supreme Court ruled Tuesday in a Los Angeles case.
This post was edited on 2/26/14 at 9:57 am
9
Posted on 2/26/14 at 9:55 am to TheDoc
Posted on 2/26/14 at 9:55 am to TheDoc
Link is broken
Posted on 2/26/14 at 9:56 am to TheDoc
fixed link
this is awful
this is awful
Posted on 2/26/14 at 9:58 am to TheDoc
quote:
Police officers may enter and search a home without a warrant as long as one occupant consents, even if another resident has previously objected, the Supreme Court ruled Tuesday in a Los Angeles case.
Would this be confined to the "shared spaces"?
In other words, I have no expectation of privacy in the Living Room and Kitchen of a shared apartment or house. But, my BEDROOM would be an area with an expectation of privacy.
If I leave by bloody knife (hypothetically) in the living room under a sofa cushion,,,a roommate could consent to the search and it could be found.
Posted on 2/26/14 at 9:59 am to TheDoc
I wonder if filing something in the mortgage records to the effect that no law enforcement of any kind may enter this property without a warrant would be sufficient.
Posted on 2/26/14 at 9:59 am to BlackHelicopterPilot
quote:
Police officers may enter and search a home without a warrant as long as one occupant consents, even if another resident has previously objected, the Supreme Court ruled Tuesday in a Los Angeles case.
TBH, this is the way I've thought it always worked.
Posted on 2/26/14 at 10:00 am to TheDoc
quote:
But Alito said police were free to search when they get the consent of the only occupant on site
"Even with modern technological advances, the warrant procedure imposes burdens on the officers who wish to search [and] the magistrate who must review the warrant application."
The horror
Posted on 2/26/14 at 10:02 am to TheDoc
quote:
as long as one occupant consents . . .
What constitutes an "occupant"? A maid? A 4y/o?
I'm sure there is some definition, but damn.
Posted on 2/26/14 at 10:07 am to upgrayedd
quote:You've obviously not seen a home searched
The horror
Posted on 2/26/14 at 10:10 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
You've obviously not seen a home searched
I meant "the horror" of a burden being put on cops to actually attain a warrant.
*sarcasm*
Posted on 2/26/14 at 10:10 am to udtiger
quote:
I wonder if filing something in the mortgage records to the effect that no law enforcement of any kind may enter this property without a warrant would be sufficient.
And then when something occurs where YOU need the police to come assist you?
Posted on 2/26/14 at 10:12 am to upgrayedd
quote:
I meant "the horror" of a burden being put on cops to actually attain a warrant.
*sarcasm*
i got it.
Posted on 2/26/14 at 10:12 am to Y.A. Tittle
And couldn't the cops just say "well we sniffed some weed so it's reasonable that we didn't even need permission to go in"
Posted on 2/26/14 at 10:15 am to Y.A. Tittle
quote:
And then when something occurs where YOU need the police to come assist you?
I don't think the police would have access to your mortgage records on the way to a 911 call.
Something like this could allow evidence seized to be thrown out later I suppose.
Posted on 2/26/14 at 10:19 am to UncleFestersLegs
Was surprised by the vote:
quote:
The voting lineup seemed to track the court's ideological divide and its gender split, with male and female justices taking opposite sides. The six men — Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, Stephen G. Breyer, Anthony M. Kennedy and Alito — voted to uphold Rojas' consent to the search. The court's three women would have honored Fernandez's objection.
Posted on 2/26/14 at 10:32 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
What constitutes an "occupant"? A maid? A 4y/o?
That was my first thought.
Posted on 2/26/14 at 10:35 am to upgrayedd
quote:
I meant "the horror" of a burden being put on cops to actually attain a warrant.
*sarcasm*
Oh.
. . . . . sorry
Posted on 2/26/14 at 10:59 am to NC_Tigah
I hope the occupant has to be an owner of the home or a co-lessee or at least the legal spouse. I hope it does not include children, guests, or room mates whose names are not on the lease.
Posted on 2/26/14 at 11:02 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
What constitutes an "occupant"? A maid? A 4y/o?
the cat?
Page 1 of 2
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News