A federal agent along with a Yuma, Az. police officer, told a Superior Court Judge that I was seen on video leaving a casino with a stolen purse. There is no video on me leaving a casino with a stolen purse or any purse and further the idividual that did leave the casino with a stolen purse admits to the police that she took it. Yet, a search warrant was issued for my home based on a lie. Could this be considered malicious prosecution?
2006-07-25 06:42:19 · 11 answers · asked by ?? 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
your lawer should be able to get the search warrant thrown out and all the evidence obtained by the search will also be thrown out.
The policy established in Mapp v. Ohio is known as the "exclusionary rule." This rule holds that if police violate your constitutional rights in order to obtain evidence, they cannot use that evidence against you. If you have been charged with a crime and you feel that the evidence was illegally obtained, your lawyer can make a "motion to suppress" in which the judge will consider the manner in which the evidence was obtained and make a decision as to whether or not it can be presented during the trial. In many instances, the evidence is central to the prosecution's case, therefore when the judge grants a motion to suppress, it is common for all charges to be dropped.
never consent to a warrantless search. say i do not consent to any searches.
remember that police are not only allowed to lie to you, it is expected. but since they lied to a judge, it counts.
remember the police are never on your side if you are a suspect.
their job is to find, arrest, and try to convict you.
if it is the wrong person they dont seem to care, because they still look like they are doing their job.
I just saw a great video at google video
"how to avoid being arrested by cops"
everyone in america should watch this so they know their rights and do not waive them.
2006-07-25 06:55:33 · answer #1 · answered by brainiac 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Was the purse recovered in your home? Did you read the warrant? The warrant needed to give the specific areas to be searched and the specific items to be seized. The premises (your home) items to be seized (the purse). Unless you are being charged then the police will more than likely claim " no harm no foul". If you are being charged, your lawyer should prepare a motion to surpress the search warrant on grounds the police lied, and it can be proven, because they better have a copy of the tape. Once that gets thrown out, all evidene obtained from that search should be thrown out on grounds that it was obtained illegally, "fruit of a poisonous tree".
It does not fall under the grounds of malicious prosecution. These officers are not prosecuting you and the prosecutors office has no knowledge that they lied to obtain a warrant until your lawyer proves it. Then the actions of the above scenerio take place.
Police lie all the time, but not all police.
2006-07-25 07:33:48 · answer #2 · answered by kentonskitty 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Whose lie is it? Is it the offenders or is it the police? If the police did lie, why did they do it? I mean, is there a video tape where they just got the wrong identity or did this cop have it "out for you" by saying such things? Law enforcement is allowed to make a mistake (misidentifying you on the videotape) but they are not allowed to carry out personal vendettas. Did a cop gain something by targeting you?
You are no longer under suspicion and nothing was taken from your home, correct? If so, I doubt you can get "malicious prosecution" as nothing has been prosecuted.
You need to contact a lawyer and give them the full details of the case. With such limited information it is very difficult to make an assessment of the situation.
2006-07-25 06:49:37 · answer #3 · answered by Goose&Tonic 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
you should probable search for suggestion from an lawyer or Public Defender in this one. a number of the failings they're going to favor to understand are: Does the campus have a written coverage/rule/regulation governing the challenge of "on-campus" dorm searches by police? if so, did you acquire a duplicate of it beforehand you moved in? (IMHO, off-campus dorms fall less than the common jurisdiction of the interior of sight police, so probable reason and warrants are surely the rule of thumb obtainable.) The coverage, if there is one, might want to stipulate what the campus police can and can't do even as looking a room, and the coverage must have some clues as to even as the hunt has to stop. A stolen Xbox is a stolen Xbox, no matter if the controllers and cables are connected; it is like affirming "i'm type of pregnant". a first rate lawyer may be able to get that ought to charge decreased, yet you'd be wanting to provide them strengthen observe and a even as to get a case at the same time. solid success!
2016-10-15 04:53:30 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Are you still being prosecuted for the stolen purse? If you can prove the agents lied/committed perjury to 'falsly obtain' a warrant its their butts. If your claims can be proven, then anything they found is inadmissable as fruits of the poisonous tree rule.
Okay, say they lied to get a search warrant of your home to look for the stolen purse. Then while they are there they find narcotics and even the stolen purse actually. Now their lying can be proven without hesitation, nothing they found is admissable or worthy of prosecution. You walk free.
2006-07-25 07:40:08 · answer #5 · answered by midnightdealer 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you can prove the information was falsely given then the search warrant is inadmissible.
Especially since supposedly a video was the basis for the warrant. A viewing of the video will prove it one way or the other.
A case could be made for malicious prosecution,if you have a good lawyer.
2006-07-25 06:47:54 · answer #6 · answered by Miss Smartypants 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
'Probable Cause' as a reason to obtain a search warrant was negated when the reasons for 'Probable Cause' were not true (lying about video survelliance). Any evidence obtained in that search would be considered inadmissable.
I don't think that could be considered malicious prosecution, but the agent and police officer would be guilty of perjury.
2006-07-25 06:47:26 · answer #7 · answered by angling_cyclist 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Search warrants are often issued on what later turns out to be bad evidence. It depends of whether or not they can convince the court that their mistake was a reasonable one at the time they sought the warrant. If their story can pass the straight-face test, then it's valid and anything they found is admissible.
2006-07-25 06:53:29 · answer #8 · answered by Pepper 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is illegal, but proving it in court is not easy to do. Cops lie in court all of the time, and who is the judge and jury more likely to believe? You may find yourself caught between a rock and a hard place.
If you CAN prove that the search warrant was obtained under false pretense, then anything that they found under the blanket of that warrant should be inadmissible in court.
2006-07-25 06:48:47 · answer #9 · answered by Oblivia 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The FBI, CIA, and local police can do anything they want and get away with it. A family member of 13 was kidnapped and the FBI is not filing any charges because they don't feel like it. The Atty. Gen and police are all going along with it. They lost evidence etc. I hope you can get help on you problem but don't count on the authorities to do anything but get you. Unless it's for their own good. Godd Luck
2006-07-25 07:29:00 · answer #10 · answered by sam04m 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋