someone was driven past a house and saw that a door was ajar.
They called the police and the police came and entered the house
without a search warrant and found marijuana. They went to go get a
search warrant from the judge. The question is that did the police have
a right to enter the house illegally
2007-01-25 07:19:26 · 22 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
No they did not have a right to enter and search the house without a warrant first. That will really teach that person to shut and lock the door next time.
2007-01-25 07:26:41 · answer #1 · answered by ehrlich 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
It' listed in the fourth amendment of the constitution..under probable cause and it states :In the context of warrants, the Oxford Companion to American Law defines probable cause as "information sufficient to warrant a prudent person's belief that the wanted individual had committed a crime (for an arrest warrant) or that evidence of a crime or contraband would be found in a search (for a search warrant)." "Probable cause" is a stronger standard of evidence than a reasonable suspicion, but weaker than what is required to secure a criminal conviction. Even hearsay can supply probable cause if it is from a reliable source or is supported by other evidence.
So I would say it falls under the hearsay...because someone reported your door ajar. They entered to do a "welfare check" on the occupants and found the marijuana in plain site and this is a valid search under our law...as I see it...sorry bummer man.
2007-01-25 07:32:55 · answer #2 · answered by Jan J 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
What if the person who called the police said he was worried that the "door ajar" meant the people inside might be harmed? In that case the police could have been entering the home to investigate and ensure the occupants were safe. I think that's legal. In the course of checking the house out, if they find a crime, they have to address it.
2007-01-25 07:33:31 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
That is the purpose of the search warrant - to get legal permission to enter the residence for the purpose of seizing an illegal substance.
The original purpose of the entry was under entirely different circumstances, and when no disturbance was found, by law, they could leave without any further ado. But because of the discovery of the marijuana, they had to get the court's permission to be on the premises for an entirely different purpose.
012507 2:29
2007-01-25 07:29:14 · answer #4 · answered by YRofTexas 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I think the point is, they were investigating a possible crime, but they knew that the marijuana couldn't be used as any evidence. That's why they got a search warrant. Do you even know if they obtained a warrant? Perhaps the judge shot down the request.
2007-01-25 07:29:04 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
NO. why would the police enter the house just because the door was open? police dont need a search warrent but need some motive to search a house. if the police suspected the person of having drugs then the police have all rights to search the house.
2007-01-25 07:27:05 · answer #6 · answered by Alex 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
The call that you made to the police that a door was open or ajar was reason enough for the police to enter the home and check on the welfare of it's occupants.....
The officers discovered the marijuana incidental to your call , and not because of it.....
They knew that the discovery of these drugs was incidental to their welfare check and that they needed a search warrant to SEARCH for any other evidence of a criminal act.......That's why they called for that warrant...
The discovery of the drugs incidental to their welfare search is "probable cause" to further search the premises.......
As drug dealers etc. do not leave their doors ajar.that alerted the officers to the possibility of other crimes committed.........They were within their rights to do what they did and that it further supported by their suspicion of other criminal activity.......
2007-01-25 07:49:41 · answer #7 · answered by cesare214 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The police can enter a home unannounced without a search warrant if there is an emergency.
2007-01-25 07:27:36 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
They Need A Search Warrant I Think.
2007-01-25 07:28:18 · answer #9 · answered by mks 7-15-02 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
No, that's no longer an invasion of privateness. various places of agency have recording instruments those days (eg. nook keep, gas station, branch shops, ATMS, and so on.) to dodge robbery, correct? properly, the traditional is an same subsequently except that's getting used to discourage human beings from breaking the regulation by technique of dashing and doubtlessly hurting/killing others.
2016-12-03 01:12:13 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋