re: Fully loaded 9mm found in Smiths car

In this situation you probably wouldn't need a warrant to search the immediate area of the vehicle. Under the seats, etc.

They sometimes need a warrant to search locked compartments but they typically don't need a warrant if they legally impound the vehicle.

This is a constantly changing area of law and can be complicated. The fact that it was an active crime scene gives them further cause to search.

They may have obtained a warrant just to be completely safe but I don't think they needed one necessarily.

quote:

---

Say they found a gun on Smith's floorboard. Would they immediately gather it and process as evidence

---

The police wouldn't have to wait then because Smith's gun would have been considered part of the crime scene. Secondly, it would have been in plain view. Same goes for the revolver found in Hayes' Hummer today. The police were probably notified by both parties (witnesses - Smith's wife, Hayes himself, Hayes' brother) where the additional weapons were but in order to make them admissible in court, they had to go through the proper channels to confiscate them.

quote:

---

Fun Bunch can you post all applicable laws so we don't have the same incorrect shite being posted over and over

---

§20. Justifiable homicide
A. A homicide is justifiable:
(1) When committed in self-defense by one who reasonably believes that he is in imminent danger of losing his life or receiving great bodily harm and that the killing is necessary to save himself from that danger.
(2) When committed for the purpose of preventing a violent or forcible felony involving danger to life or of great bodily harm by one who reasonably believes that such an offense is about to be committed and that such action is necessary for its prevention. The circumstances must be sufficient to excite the fear of a reasonable person that there would be serious danger to his own life or person if he attempted to prevent the felony without the killing.
(3) When committed against a person whom one reasonably believes to be likely to use any unlawful force against a person present in a dwelling or a place of business, or when committed against a person whom one reasonably believes is attempting to use any unlawful force against a person present in a motor vehicle as defined in R.S. 32:1(40), while committing or attempting to commit a burglary or robbery of such dwelling, business, or motor vehicle.
(4)(a) When committed by a person lawfully inside a dwelling, a place of business, or a motor vehicle as defined in R.S. 32:1(40) when the conflict began, against a person who is attempting to make an unlawful entry into the dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle, or who has made an unlawful entry into the dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle, and the person committing the homicide reasonably believes that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent the entry or to compel the intruder to leave the dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle.
(b) The provisions of this Paragraph shall not apply when the person committing the homicide is engaged, at the time of the homicide, in the acquisition of, the distribution of, or possession of, with intent to distribute a controlled dangerous substance in violation of the provisions of the Uniform Controlled Dangerous Substances Law.
B. For the purposes of this Section, there shall be a presumption that a person lawfully inside a dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle held a reasonable belief that the use of deadly force was necessary to prevent unlawful entry thereto, or to compel an unlawful intruder to leave the dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle when the conflict began, if both of the following occur:
(1) The person against whom deadly force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcibly entering or had unlawfully and forcibly entered the dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle.
(2) The person who used deadly force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry was occurring or had occurred.
C. A person who is not engaged in unlawful activity and who is in a place where he or she has a right to be shall have no duty to retreat before using deadly force as provided for in this Section, and may stand his or her ground and meet force with force.
D. No finder of fact shall be permitted to consider the possibility of retreat as a factor in determining whether or not the person who used deadly force had a reasonable belief that deadly force was reasonable and apparently necessary to prevent a violent or forcible felony involving life or great bodily harm or to prevent the unlawful entry.

Since when after a shooting death involving two vehicles does LE need to wait to search?

and you dont think finding/knowing their was gun changes anything for Hayes?

No. Not necessarily.

quote:

---

Manager at Sake said that none of the Smith party were impaired.

---

No offense, but Sake Cafe on Magazine has been one of the go-to Saints hangouts for at least 10 years.

As an aside, I miss the Uptown roll so damn bad - I've been to freaking Japan and have not had sushi that good.

quote:

---

No. Not necessarily.

---

would he have had any shot at a lesser charge if there was no firearm in Will Smith's car?

I just don't see how that is possible. short explanation please.

quote:

---

Why did they need a warrant to retrieve Smith's gun? I'd think the wife gave permission to access anything they need to make sure her husband's killer is locked up forever.

Did she have something to hide?

---

She was shot twice and hauled away in an ambulance.

Jesus, people.