Let's say a business is getting raided for selling narcotics. Does the owner always get arrested? Or just the people doing the selling? What if the owner(s) have a drug history? What about the homes of the owners? Do they raid the homes as well?
2006-10-25 03:19:05 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law Enforcement & Police
Can you let me know if you work in law enforcement when you answer?
2006-10-25 03:53:21 · update #1
This is in California, in case that makes any difference.
2006-10-25 11:05:36 · update #2
Your dealing with a few different issues here.
1st- When a search warrant is executed it is very specific in what/who may be search. The warrant will start with the place of search (the business) and if there are people who need to be searched they will be listed BY NAME on the search warrant. It is illegal (per supreme court case law) and a violation of the 4th amendment to search people just for being present in an establishment if there is no reasonable suspicion to think they are involved in the crime. To put ANYONE on the search warrant the police must have probable cause the believe that the person is in possession of contraband, evidence of crime, etc.
The owners drug history is NOT enough to alone establish probable cause.
The homes of the owners may only be searched if there is probable cause to search for the fruits of a crime. So it's not automatic, but if they had PC to search the establishment owned by those people, odds are they already have a second search warrant in hand for their homes, vehicles, etc.
2006-10-25 07:08:10 · answer #1 · answered by Matt B 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I hope they raid the homes at the same time they raid the business. The owner will loose his home and business, if drug sales go on in his business, he is required to notify police once he becomes aware of the problem, if he chooses not to, he will be considered an accomplice, he will be arrested, I am not in Law Enforcement.
2006-10-25 03:29:59 · answer #2 · answered by mimi 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It all depend on how involved the owner is, and what evidence the police got on him.
2006-10-25 03:34:57 · answer #3 · answered by WC 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If the owner of the business has no idea that illegal activity has occurred then he cannot be liable.
2006-10-25 08:36:40 · answer #4 · answered by Michael R 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
A warrant for what? To search? To arrest anybody inside? The basic questions about search and seizure w/o warrant are these: 1) standing - warrants are very specific in a number of ways including whose rights are being protected. SW protect the right of privacy of anybody who had a reasonable expectation of privacy in that location. If the circumstances preceding the search do not trigger an exception to the warrant-by-search rule, the search will still be upheld (and recovered evidence won't be suppressed) in any case against a person who had no expectation of privacy in the location. 2) was the club an area in which anybody could have had a reasonable expectation of privacy. On neither of these questions does a SW become a requirement. The owner has no standing because he likely faces routine inspections by any number of municipal or state agencies (dept. of health, food handling, labor, fire, liquor) so that he can't expect privacy there. Also, if he incorporated the club, then he's subject to inspection by his Dept. of State. The patrons are even worse off - they have no connection at all to the club, so they can't say they expected privacy.
2016-05-22 12:42:27 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
becareful the feds dont get involed in it and yes the oweners can get poped too just for knowing it was there
2006-10-25 05:00:30 · answer #6 · answered by soldierofyah7 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
most likely
2006-10-25 03:22:04 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
HELL YEAH
2006-10-25 03:21:26 · answer #8 · answered by Chad S 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋