SCOTUS rules illegal search evidence usable sometimes

[dc dalton]

Well while we were watching the 1st and 2nd amendments the supreme court has just shot a big hole in the 4th. Search warrant invalid, oh sorry just a mistake but the evidence gained from the search can still be used in court.

http://fe11.story.media.ac4.yahoo.co...cotus_evidence

[LorDiego01]

LOL

All your Rights Are Belong to Us.

[-JD-]

"... conservative majority ..." my ass. Authoritarian plain and simple.

It is amazing how fast you can erode something when you go at it from both sides.

[jerkin]

Wow, I can't believe I'm siding with Liberal Justices on something!

[Kimba]

This almost brought a tear to my eye. While I am not a fan of illegal activities, I am in favor upholding the Constitution. These Judges, who's purpose is to uphold the Constitution have let down our forefathers and the American people. Shame on them.

[ReefBlue]

They're trying to combat the problem of a typo or some kind of error, not abuse.

If you're serving a search warrant for 100 Elm Street and you execute the warrant and find whatever it was you're looking for, but the street address on the paper says 1000 Elm street, yet everything else was correct, is the case now invalid? No longer.

Again, getting someone's middle name wrong on paperwork shouldn't invalidate a case against someone.

If a bunch of cops kick your door for no reason just to see what you're doing, that is a completely different story, and that protection still exists.

[/dev/null]

This is going to be interesting... what exactly IS the interpretation of;

"when police mistakes are the result of negligence such as that described here, rather than systemic error or reckless disregard of constitutional requirements."

I can see this taking DECADES and countless millions of defendants money to figure out

[JoeWilliams]

Well, we aren't using the rest of the Constitution, may as well throw the fourth on the bonfire, too.

[Kimba]

An error is an error. The police should not be able to benefit from their own errors. What if they confused you with someone with a similar name on a warrant?

What if it were you that the police had an invalid warrant for? They searched and found something they didn't like. Would you stand back and say, you got me? No, you would fight the illegally obtained evidence.

Illegal searches are not Constitution whether because of a typo or willful disregard.

One more level of erosion.

[-JD-]

They're trying to combat the problem of a typo or some kind of error, not abuse.

If you're serving a search warrant for 100 Elm Street and you execute the warrant and find whatever it was you're looking for, but the street address on the paper says 1000 Elm street, yet everything else was correct, is the case now invalid? No longer.

Again, getting someone's middle name wrong on paperwork shouldn't invalidate a case against someone.

If a bunch of cops kick your door for no reason just to see what you're doing, that is a completely different story, and that protection still exists.

Oops, we made a mistake. Wrong house. But since we are here, you are laying naked and handcuffed on the floor, and we are pointing our guns at your head, we are going to toss the place any way - OK?

The government should never benefit from their mistakes at the expense of a citizen!