Heres the situation, the police respond to a domestic disturbance, a couple somewhat prone to such conflict. And during a search of their apartment find three marijuana joints in the husbands pants pocket. They reside in Arizona and he is looking at three years, apparently hes had afew non violent drug related convictions in California. Does this sound a bit extreme. And why were the police searching a pair of pants that were'nt even being worn ? Bear in mind this is intially a domestic dispute. Any info on this search and sentence length ??
2007-06-06 21:08:12 · 14 answers · asked by Aptoslady 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Law Enforcement & Police
Aptoslady,
Under the Fourth Amendment, "Probable Cause" or "Exigent Circumstances" must exist in order to enter the home and then "Search". Police may "Secure" the immediate area to insure their safety and anything in "Plain View" that is Illegal my be confiscated and the possessor charged. However the fact that police searched an "Unoccupied" pair of pants and the fact that he was not wearing them constitute Unlawful Search and Seizure, as there had to have been exigent circumstances in place to search any further than the Immediate area. Now "If", there was a report of a weapon involved, or the "Victim" asserted claim of a weapon, then police may search for the weapon. The fact that they found 3 joints pursuant to a search for a weapon does not constitute a Legal Search and Seizure as they had no "Warrant" therefore the 3 joints are not admissible and a "Motion to Suppress Evidence of Illegal Search and Seizure" should be filed. Also if the D.A. is going to enhance the charges because of "Extraneous Offences" then a Motion to Suppress Evidence of Extraneous Offences should also be filed pursuant to an Unlawful Search and Seizure. I would also ask that you keep in mind that in the United States you can be charged with anything but, proving the charges are a different matter. In Texas, If the D.A.'s could indict a watermelon they would. Hope this helps.
GOD BLESS GOOD LUCK!!
2007-06-07 01:09:54 · answer #1 · answered by Chuck-the-Duck 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
i agree it depends if he was wearing pants or if he told the officers his id was in those pants, although, it could be a illegal search depending on a lot more circumstances. although in a lot of states when someone has a drug charge of any kind and police deal with them they can search things without a warrant if they have suspicion. I am not sure of Az laws on that but a lot of states can. I would have him consult a lawyer there and see what they say, it also should be in the police report why the police searched those pants. That may help.
2007-06-07 00:23:45 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you are taken into custody in your home, an officer without a warrant can search only the limited area in which you are arrested. Other rooms — and even other parts of the same room — are off limits, unless the officer believes that other suspects are hiding in other rooms. While searching your home, an officer can seize evidence of any crime, such as stolen property or drugs, which is in plain sight.
One More thought: If he wasn't wearing his pants at the time, they may have picked them up and searched them before giving them to him to put on.
2007-06-06 22:54:57 · answer #3 · answered by Cindy 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Dang! The cops don't usually care much about a couple of joints in Santa Cruz county. I wonder why they were searching his pants too (unless he wasn't wearing any pants when they arrived and they wanted to "look for his ID").
I don't think his state of residence matters much. If he's got a record of drug offenses, he may have exhausted his opportunity for diversion. If the cops knew he was on probation or something, that might have had something to do with why they searched his pants.
Or, they could have just been having a crappy day and decided to take it out on somebody....
Peace, from Bonny Doon!
2007-06-06 21:19:58 · answer #4 · answered by oimwoomwio 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Is it perhaps that the Police had reason to suspect that the two people involved in the dispute were under the influence of drugs, probably caused by the physical condition they were in.
If the guy gets prison his tough, for creating a situation at home that could lead to the Police being called, with his past record he should have learned to zip it and keep a low profile.
2007-06-06 21:38:22 · answer #5 · answered by conranger1 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Was he going to be wearing the pants? That seems like the only reason to check the pockets unless his wife or kids told the cops to check there. Sounds fishy though since depending on the style of pants or container used joints would be crushed and pot lost by keeping them in a pocket, even in a bag they would get crushed or broken.
3 years must be the maximum sentence? Which means he'll get probation and a fine? 3 just sounds too severe that's a year a joint. In most states they wouldn't bother to prosecute such a small amount as it's a waste of prosecutor's time.
2007-06-06 23:21:50 · answer #6 · answered by tmilestc 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Were the police officers invited inside the house? If so, anything they find is fair game, no matter where it is located. Think about that part of it. Secondly, there is a history of drug abuse and convictions. Is he a parolee or a probationer? Then they have the right to search the entire premises under the contraband in a prisoner's posession rules. The paroles/pardons or probation department give that duty to peace officers, and they may look anytime they please to ensure the offender is in compliance with ALL conditions of his/her release. Search legal in that case.
2007-06-07 00:36:42 · answer #7 · answered by Roosterkroozer 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Could be, it's reasonable if he isn't wearing pants and he's going to put them on, the officers can reasonably search the pants to make sure there's no weapons, and in the course of the search find the narcotics. Especially since this is a domestic, weapons are pretty high up on the officers' concerns.
I say good search, in the absence of further information.
2007-06-06 21:36:26 · answer #8 · answered by trueblue3167 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Two possible answers-when someone is arrested their officers can search within what is called lunge-able reach-that area which a subject could reasonably be expected to be able to reach and 2, If the guy was being arrested in his underwear or less then the officers would obtain a pair of his pants to cover him before taking him to jail-pants would be checked for contraband or weapons. Jail is-one place you don't wanna be without pants!!!
2007-06-06 21:40:09 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Don't know why the Police looked in the pants. There is not enough information in your scenario. If you send me a link to a story or provide me with more info I'll give you my best Monday morning quarterback answer.
The Police have nothing to do with how long the guy gets sentenced for. That is up to the court.
2007-06-06 21:12:43 · answer #10 · answered by El Scott 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋