Article from The Daily Wire by Ashe Schow.
The three-judge appellate court, which consists of two judges appointed by President Donald Trump and one by former President Bill Clinton, concluded that the government had enough probable cause to obtain a search warrant even without the illegal evidence:
All agree: the DEA entry team entered Huskisson’s house unlawfully. We do not condone this illegal behavior by law enforcement; the better practice is to obtain a warrant before entering a home. Ordinarily, the evidence found here would be excluded. But because the government had so much other evidence of probable cause, and had already planned to apply for a warrant before the illegal entry, the evidence is admissible. Though the government should not profit from its bad behavior, neither should it be placed in a worse position than it would otherwise have occupied.
Attorney Marcus L. Schantz, replying to a tweet from USA Today editor Brad Heath, explained the problems with this decision:
SCOTUS needs to weigh in on this. The logical extension of that holding is that police can enter a home willy nilly and get the warrant later. No. No. No. No. A judge or magistrate decides if the police can enter, and there’s no guarantee the warrant will be approved.
SCOTUS needs to weigh in on this. The logical extension of that holding is that police can enter a home willy nilly and get the warrant later. No. No. No. No. A judge or magistrate decides if the police can enter, and there’s no guarantee the warrant will be approved.
— Attorney Marcus L. Schantz (@SchantzLaw2019) June 6, 2019
Read the entire article at The Daily Wire.
wpDiscuz
…the reason cops think they are above the law
…the reason cops think they are above the law
So, by their logic, I don’t need to have insurance since I was planning on getting it anyway right before that major accident.
Did I get that right?
Probable not, since you are not “government”.
In 86 years of a not especially sheltered life, I have never seen, heard or read of such arrant nonsense. The above is likely an unwarrantedly polite expression of my thoughts.
Thats why you should aim for the face is someone kicks your door down!
Quite likely, the above described antics will, perhaps unfortunately, promote exactly such a response
What Court, what State was this ruling made?
We’ve all heard of inevitable discovery. Now we have inevitable warrant. Sounds like the Red Coats are running the government.
I can only think time must have been of the essence and they were trying to catch a really bad guy or perhaps a terrorist. I can think of certain circumstances where this would be smart to do. This article doesn’t give us the details on that. The downside is this could be the beginning of a slippery slope ending with making this a regular habit for searches of others with less serious matters.
All they hadvto do was wake up a judge to get a warrant. In the mean time keep suspects under servailence. This action could end up blowing they’re case out of court.
Game Wardens can break into a home without a warrant which is pure BS! I’ve read the 4th Amendment over, under, upside and down and didn’t see an exception for game wardens. And bounty hunters can legally break into a person’s home or property to “arrest” them. Not that I have any use for bail jumpers but I have to question this. I can only see that as a private individual acting in behalf of another private individual (bail bondsman) and therefore an officer of the court makes this legal and are not violating a person’s rights in doing this.
One of many reasons I support and teach “Jury Nullification”.
The judge may allow it but the jurors do not have to weigh it into their decision.
As a juror you do not need to explain your vote and cannot be punished or sanctioned for your vote.
According to the first chief Supreme Court Justice you have a duty to consider the law as well as the case and your only duty is to Justice itself, not the law or the court.
“Not Guilty” is one power the government cannot take from us or usurp.
All they need now is Swastika arm bands. Hitler would be pleased.
Apparently the law only applies to whom they choose. This type of action only serves to widen the gap between law enforcement and the public. United we stand, divided we fall. Everyday the “us and them” divide grows with no accountability…
i agree,right??? THIS IS MOST APPARENT IN COLONIE, NEW YORK, WHERE A PERSONS’ RIGHTS ARE TRAMPLED IN THE DUST AND [ MIRANDA ] IS TOTALLY DISREGARDED AND FALSE EVIDENCE IS USED TO CONVICT AS WELL AS PERJURED TESTIMONY BY PLAINTIFF ,WITHOUT CAUSE,RIGHT???
I will shoot anyone that breaks into my home or property. Bad people pose as law enforcement, you are never sure if the person at your door is good or bad, I never engage in anything illegal, no one has any reason to force their way into my home, kick in my door, I’ll shoot you.