Case Citation: Kentucky. v.King, 563 U.S. (2011) Parties: Kentucky, Petitioner Hollis King, Respondent Facts: In Lexington, Kentucky, police officers entered an apartment building. They were in search of a suspect who had sold cocaine to an undercover informant. After a chase, police lost the suspect. They came to an apartment building where they smelled marijuana coming from one of the doors.
If an officer is in his patrol car attempting to pull someone over after witnessing a drug deal, the suspect flees and a foot chase pursues. The suspect is on his/her way into the house and yells out “COPS, FLUSH IT”, the officer has a right to enter that house, and perform a search for drugs. When there is a chance that evidence will be destroyed, a warrant is not needed. This also holds true if an officer is doing a routine patrol of a neighborhood, and hears some screaming coming from the inside of a house. The officer has a right to enter that residence to make sure that everyone in the house is ok.
To my discovery, the lights did not turn on. The first thing I need to do is assess the situation. I am going to look for any signs of forced entry, which is my first thought. I see no signs of broken glass and the door was still locked, so I am going to rule out the idea of someone breaking into my house. Next, I am going to assume since the lights will not turn on, then the power must be out and it must be out in the entire neighborhood.
Probable Cause Article Summary In order to issue to a search warrant, a judge must sign the order and authorize and obtain the specifics along with the location. The search warrant is only good for the specified location, so if the warrant specifies the garage at a certain address, authorities cannot search the inside of the home as well. In an article published online regarding the Trayvon Martin case, Reverend Al Sharpton stated he was enforcing the arrest of George Zimmerman regarding the released videos that gave probable cause to arrest him “for obstruction of justice and for filing a false police report if in fact he told police he sustained a broken nose and other injuries” (EurPublisher, 2012). Warrant requirement exceptions can be anything from roadside sobriety checkpoints, which have been court approved but must be done in a fair and organized manner. “For example, it makes little sense to require an officer to obtain a search warrant to seize contraband that is in plain view.
CRIME Corporal Anthony Damiano Paterson Police Department Passaic County Patterson, NJ Corporal Anthony Damiano works the drug projects of Passaic County New Jersey which are currently under surveillance. Corporal Damiano and his partner stop an older vehicle just coming out of the projects. Calmly the driver is asked to step out of the vehicle and is then immediately questioned about the drug purchased that was just witnessed by the two officers. The driver, Raymond, is a 31 year old, Caucasian male with stocky build, full beard and mustache, dressed in a T-shirt, jeans and baseball cap. The passenger is a 32 year old Caucasian male similarly dressed and admittedly confesses “doing crack with Raymond”.
Two AID investigators soon arrived and DiLacqua told them the story he had prepared, with Brady and the two officers standing by. (7) DiLacqua's testimony is another false report. After trying to retrieve some items Brady had forgotten at the bar (including his service revolver), DiLacqua ordered Yatcilla to drive Brady home--something, one hopes, the Philadelphia police would do for any driver whose car was disabled in an
Despite this statement from the nurse the assistant principal believed that the student was “high” because he had “red and bloodshot eyes”. The principal then had the school officer search the accused students body which turned up no drugs. They then decided to search the student’s locker, they asked the student if he had drugs in his locker, he stated no, upon arriving at his locker the student admitted to having brass knuckles in the locker. The search did in fact turn up the brass knuckles but no drugs. The accused student and parents sued the district for violating his 4th Amendment Rights.
Florida v. Jardines CJA/354 Albert Cobos May 16, 2013 Kayla Robeson Florida v. Jardines The police took a drug-sniffing dog to the defendant’s Jardines’ front porch where the dog gave a positive alert for narcotics. Based on the alert, the officers obtained a warrant for a search, which revealed marijuana plants; Jardines was charged with trafficking in cannabis. The Supreme Court of Florida approved the trial court’s decision to suppress the evidence, holding that the officers had engaged in a Fourth Amendment search unsupported by probable cause. The Supreme Court decided that since the officers were on the defendant’s front porch with a dog that is trained with an extra keen sense of drugs that was a violation against the fourth amendment of wrongful search of the home. Florida v. Jardines Certiorari to the Supreme Court of Florida No.11-564 Argued October31, 2012-Decided March 26, 2013 In the case of Florida v. Jardines what interested me the most in this case is that police officers for many years have been using drug sniffing canines to detect illegal substances in people homes for many years but was never considered a violation of ones rights.
Yes, from my observation of the marijuana plants you would need a search warrant to enter and search the house and the resident, but in saying that you would need probable cause, which refers to the requirement in criminal law that police have adequate reason to arrest someone, conduct a search or seize property relating to an alleged crime to enter the house, so in this case the citizens are breaking the law due to growing illegal drugs. If you enter the residence and seize additional evidence inside and that search and seizure is later deemed illegal, would the additional evidence be admissible in court? Why or why not? In my opinion any additional evidence inside the premises would not be admissible in court, this is because as I stated above that any evidence that was collected at the premises and either the search warrant was not issued or was deemed to be
A twenty-five year-old man passes a beautiful house o a huge private property and makes a decision that he wants to have a look inside. When he arrives in front of the gate, there is a large sign stating, “NO TRESPASSING.” The young man peeks through the gate and observes that no one is in the yard. So he decides to ignore the sign and enter the property. Ten minutes into the property, the man heeds to the sound of two gunshots out of nowhere and gets shot by the third one. It was the owner of the property who shot him.