- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Score Board
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- SEC Score Board
- 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
Kansas Court rules reclined seats, clear bags justification for warrantless search
Posted on 4/10/17 at 11:46 am
Posted on 4/10/17 at 11:46 am
Posted on 4/10/17 at 11:47 am to skrayper
It doesn't exist anymore. See Obama: Change and Hope, baby.
Posted on 4/10/17 at 11:48 am to skrayper
Republicans and Democrats, no difference between them. Both taking away our rights.
Posted on 4/10/17 at 11:48 am to Errerrerrwere
quote:
It doesn't exist anymore. See Obama: Change and Hope, baby.
Uh, states don't get much "Redder" than Kansas.
Posted on 4/10/17 at 11:57 am to skrayper
Ziplock's to carry warning:
Use in car inviolates 4th Amendment
Use in car inviolates 4th Amendment
Posted on 4/10/17 at 12:01 pm to skrayper
Well, as long as it isn't done by the NSA, it's wrong.
Posted on 4/10/17 at 12:10 pm to skrayper
Reclined seats? Seriously?
Posted on 4/10/17 at 12:28 pm to skrayper
BUT BUT BUT they found illegal stuff. They shouldn't have had it in the first place!!!!111one
You will see this point argued by the big statists throughout the duration of this thread. Which is a problem. That thought process is why courts and law enforcement agencies get away with this shite
You will see this point argued by the big statists throughout the duration of this thread. Which is a problem. That thought process is why courts and law enforcement agencies get away with this shite
Posted on 4/10/17 at 12:33 pm to tiger1014
Well , imagine that. The police can use their common sense to add 2 + 2 and see that it equals 4.
What is the damn problem here? And I love how the article makes a repeated point about the passenger being pregnant, because as well all know, pregnant women never engage in illegal behavior.
What is the damn problem here? And I love how the article makes a repeated point about the passenger being pregnant, because as well all know, pregnant women never engage in illegal behavior.
Posted on 4/10/17 at 12:35 pm to skrayper
Clear Bags?
like sammich bags?
like sammich bags?
Posted on 4/10/17 at 12:35 pm to skrayper
Considering the source, why do I have the feeling that the facts are not at all as they are portrayed in the article and provocative thread title?
Posted on 4/10/17 at 12:36 pm to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
quote:
HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
Here is our first big statist
Welcome
Posted on 4/10/17 at 12:48 pm to Willie Stroker
After reviewing the facts of the case, everything checks out as legit:
Legal stop? Check. Officer made the stop after observing the driver cut through a parking lot to avoid a traffic light.
Legal arrest? Check. Driver had an active warrant. So did the passenger.
Exigent circumstances to justify warrantless search? Check. Being in a moving vehicle alone fulfills this requirement to base a warrantless search solely on probable cause.
Probable cause? Check. Driver admitted the plastic baggie previously held marijuana. This helped establish probable cause, in addition to the passenger's behavior after the officer initiated a stop.
Legal stop? Check. Officer made the stop after observing the driver cut through a parking lot to avoid a traffic light.
Legal arrest? Check. Driver had an active warrant. So did the passenger.
Exigent circumstances to justify warrantless search? Check. Being in a moving vehicle alone fulfills this requirement to base a warrantless search solely on probable cause.
Probable cause? Check. Driver admitted the plastic baggie previously held marijuana. This helped establish probable cause, in addition to the passenger's behavior after the officer initiated a stop.
Posted on 4/10/17 at 3:54 pm to Willie Stroker
quote:
Legal stop? Check. Officer made the stop after observing the driver cut through a parking lot to avoid a traffic light.
Sure, but not enough to justify the search.
quote:
Legal arrest? Check. Driver had an active warrant. So did the passenger.
Debatable, considering that the state that would have issued the warrant never did so (Missouri). This was Kansas being Kansas.
quote:
He was in full compliance with federal and state law to buy the weapon, but there was a complication. In 2006 Howard had pleaded guilty to burglary in Missouri. He never served time as the judge suspended his sentence as part of a diversion agreement that kept Howard from being considered a convicted felon -- in Missouri. Howard did not realize that Kansas does not accept this agreement.
quote:
On October 17, 2008, the Missouri court determined that Howard had successfully completed his probation and discharged him from the court's jurisdiction. It further ordered that the file be "a closed record to the extent provided by law," as prescribed by Mo. Rev. Stat. § 610.105.1.
quote:
Exigent circumstances to justify warrantless search? Check. Being in a moving vehicle alone fulfills this requirement to base a warrantless search solely on probable cause.
Here's the crux of the issue. It shouldn't - the 4th Amendment states:
quote:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Declaring a moving vehicle as an exemption to this doesn't jive with what the Founding Fathers appear to have intended, as they didn't just say "houses".
The Supreme Court has even weighed in on this concept, and determined that a vehicle most CERTAINLY counts as an "effect" in United States v Jones, 2012
quote:
Probable cause? Check. Driver admitted the plastic baggie previously held marijuana. This helped establish probable cause, in addition to the passenger's behavior after the officer initiated a stop.
The baggie was identified AFTER the illegal search, which hardly justifies your statement.
quote:
After finding the firearm, Loughman Mirandized Howard. Loughman then asked Howard about the plastic baggie. Howard responded that the baggie had previously held marijuana.
Not to mention that the State tried to push a motion to withhold that the firearm was purchased legally.
quote:
Finally, the State filed a motion in limine requesting that the court preclude Howard from "introducing evidence that [Howard] legally purchased the firearm in the state of Missouri or any federal records pertaining [to] the purchase of the firearm."
Most of the quotes came from here, the Kansas Supreme Court Opinion - Stuff
Summary:
Legal Stop - Yes, ticket-able offense
Legal Arrest - For the cop, maybe. For the state of Kansas, no.
Justification of warrantless search? None yet.
Probable Cause? If it's after the act, it's not "cause".
Posted on 4/10/17 at 3:59 pm to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
quote:
And I love how the article makes a repeated point about the passenger being pregnant, because as well all know, pregnant women never engage in illegal behavior.
I think the point was that the seat was reclined, because she was pregnant. It wasn't reclined, because she was low-riding Cheech and Chong style.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News