Supreme Court expands police authority in home searches
Posted in the Lucedale Forum
Since: Sep 09
#1 Feb 26, 2014
By Los Angeles Times February 26, 2014 12:25 pm
WASHINGTON -- Police officers may enter and search a home without a warrant as long as one occupant consents, even if another resident has previously objected, the Supreme Court ruled Tuesday in a Los Angeles case.
The 6-3 ruling, triggered by a Los Angeles Police Department arrest in 2009, gives authorities more leeway to search homes without obtaining a warrant, even when there is no emergency.
The majority, led by Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., said police need not take the time to get a magistrate's approval before entering a home in such cases. But dissenters, led by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, warned that the decision would erode protections against warrantless home searches. The court had previously held that such protections were at the "very core" of the 4th Amendment and its ban on unreasonable searches and seizures.
In 2006, the court had ruled in a Georgia case that a husband standing in the doorway could block police from searching his home, even if his estranged wife consented. In Tuesday's opinion, the majority said that rule applied only when the co-owner was "physically present" to object.
Add your comments below
|Will Waveland cops have to pay to take home the...||Jan 28||Waveland Citizen||1|
|George County Sheriff candidates (Mar '15)||Jan '18||TheTruth||16|
|Scoop (May '14)||Dec '17||nawuhuh||6|
|Firing of warden (May '14)||Dec '17||get_down_tonight||8|
|Black teeth (Dec '16)||Dec '17||sanbog||28|
|Couple expecting baby murdered (Jan '08)||Dec '17||Juju||20|
Find what you want!
Search Lucedale Forum Now
Copyright © 2018 Topix LLC