Particularity in Search Warrants
Вставка
- Опубліковано 1 бер 2016
- Criminal Procedure video introduction to the particularity requirement for valid search warrants. The warrant must identify with reasonable particularity the place to be searched and the items to be seized. We consider a famous 19th century example and more recent examples.
Very nice explanation of Search Warrants for first year law students who only know what they see on Law and Order and movies. I am a retired Federal LEO with 29 years of experience in obtaining Search Warrants. I have probably been the affiant in a thousand Warrants. Nothing you said was wrong. You just did not say enough. The Affiant's track record with the magistrate is taken into account. Usually, feds work with Assistant USAs. I remember taking a Search Warrant application to a new AUSA. She read it and told me I did not have probable cause. This was for a search of a parcel in the US Mail. I suspected it contained marijuana. Instead of arguing with her I was just going to go down the hall for another Assistant AUSA, I know you will call that fishing, but just as I was leaving another, more experienced walked into her office. She handed him the application, and said, "he doesn't have probable cause, does he?" He just looked at me, called me by my first name and asked, "who was the dog?" The Affidavit stated the canine detection dog's name and number. I told him the dog's name. He told her I had probable cause. He initialed the Warrant. the magistrate signed it, and I hit pay dirt. The dog's history of not "hitting dry holes" was one of the more compelling reasons the Warrant was signed. Keep up the good work on educating these kids. consider having a guest lecturer who has actually requested, received, executed, and returned a Warrant. I like that you explained that you cannot search for an elephant in a tea cup.
One thing we’ve been doing to hold law enforcement accountable is that law enforcement is rubber stamping warrants. That’s fraud, oath violation, etc.
I work in criminal defense law and have been involved in 100s challenges to search warrants. In my anecdotal experience, together with reviewing 10 of thousands of case opinions, I’d say upwards 80% of warrants lack particularly, especially so when applied to smartphones. It’s an area of law that many (arguably most) police, prosecutors, judges and even defense lawyers often lack substantive and procedural knowledge and is the paramount driving force behind the phenomena of modern-day general warrants. And, unfortunately, courts routinely uphold searches or seizures engendered by unconstitutionally over-broad warrants in essentially every jurisdiction in this country. Our rights against unreasonable searches and seizures have been chipped away subtly but steadily over the last 70 years (especially after the overruling of the US v. Boyd), with one of the most notable degradations being Terry v. Ohio (a reading of common law of the founding era quickly reveals that all seizures of the person were considered “arrests” requiring probable cause as no other seizure of the person was known to common law). Vast majority of the people are blissfully, yet dangerously, ignorant to these occurrences and will likely remains so until it’s too late.
@@jayrobertson5990 i have been, before taking law classes (only did so to see HOW they teach) studied criminal law and constitutional law interpretations continuously since 2011! The readings are a rush!!!! The Law Reviews are GREAT sources also!!!! In many instances, they’re better than the court case decisions!
Yes, i get they need a warrant! HOWEVER, the warrant AAAAAAAND search warrant affidavit are REQUIRED to articulate with specificity, what area of the item (cellphone) in question needs searching and why!!!! Of course, and NOOOOO one challenges this, cops will say they don’t have the equipment to only search one particular area!!!! Oh well!!!! Can’t search the phone then!!!! And that Bullshit, “Good-faith exception” crap won’t work either!!!!
Due to one’s privacy (keyword), not fully knowing what kind of 3rd Party (might not have proper Delegation of Authority) is retrieving such information, how is one to know our privacy is being protected and not abused? Meaning, they are to perform in good faith, with clean hands, and in honor!!!! ALSO, would they be willing to say they, like government agencies, are performing in their individual and corporate capacities? If yes, GREAT!!!! That means if one wishes to sue them (3rd Party), they can’t say they were acting in a private capacity!!!!
If anyone, after researching police corruption CONSTANTLY since 2011 says, we can trust the police and nothing to fear about out private information, i HIGHLY suggest they check themselves into a mental facility!!!! NEEEEEEEEVER trust police!!!!
i can talk about this with case laws, quoting what some justices (Chief Justice John Roberts, Associate Justices Louis D. Brandeis, & Boston Lawyer, Samuel Warren) said about privacy, what i say here makes PERFECT sense!!!!
Also, as to what i have said, various case laws interpreting various penumbra’s, umbra’s, and antumbra’s about our privacy rights (not to be confused with some privilege), i can converse on until the cows come home! Never stopping with studies because it will forever be a continuous education!
Studying tradition and history going back to the Writs of Assistance, as for our smart phone’s, like other searches, cops are NOT allowed, for example, to search through one’s pictures, text messages, contacts, internet search history, etc., etc., if they only need something from voice memos located in the utilities area!!!! It can ONLY be an area that can be linked to alleged evidence law encroachment, sorry, enforcement, seeks!!!!
The courts have been very specific when it comes to area’s (keyword) as it pertains to searches!!!! Each app is in fact a separate area within the phone that has a separate functions!!!! Some corrupt Distrust District Attorney will also try to use how the word “area,” “area search,” blah, blah blah, is not adequately defined 🤦🏾♂️!!!! That would then mean they are indirectly saying the definition is vague!!!! Won’t go into what my favorite Associate Justice, Antonin Scalia, says about vagueness!!!! Pretty sure you also know!!!!
I seriously need this situation looked in to and am currently in the process of suing the city of hibbing and the st Louis county sheriff's dept and hibbing police dept for numerous events of which were all captured on camera soon people will finally see how corrupt these officers really are
If anything happens to me in the process I will know exactly where to start an investigation thank you and I appreciate all of your help on this issue Cameron Douglass clark
Confused about what the comment meant
What about all the stuff they take without reporting it?
That should not occur. If it does, citizen's need to report that. Otherwise, you are simply allowing the officer(s) to continue to do so. Our laws are dependent on most citizens be active members of the community.
arent the inventory and or reurn and or report required ot be given to all people who lived at a property house when they ask for it? i have asked for 20 months and still got nothing from 4 police offices - search warant officers, property room, investigator case file manager, and DA office
I have one and this is from someone claiming to teach police officers how to write warrants because apparently this is not taught or taught poorly. So a warrant for searching for a big screen tv. That was stolen in a burglary. The short of it the search was for the tv obviously but also for burglary tools. To me this basically opens the door to search every inch of the property. My other concern is that he said that probable cause does not even have to be likely. That sounds bad, terrible and what the cop does not have to explain why his cause turned out to be wrong. Are police required to wear cameras during a search and can a homeowner request to be present or have a representative present during a search?
hi so i roomate had a search warrant, then cops show up to search the whole house and his name only, then they find out their are 3 renters there right before they start, they then go in all their bedrooms and take their stuff, 1 year later all charges are dropped on the roomate, jnone of the other 3 roomates ever had any charges on them or their items taken. So if a search warrant police officers have but have never given to the 3 people a copy of the search warrant - extension ammendment - so pertaining to them and their rooms - after 20 months = 6 months after the case is over - doesn't that in invalidate it? how do they have the right to take anythig when they said they would give a copy within a few days and never did despite several opportunites and a bunch of requests for it
I have known case in Ohio this has broken to search vehicle after illegal using trick to get search order. for vehicle which got charges dropped later as officer in Columbus has city being sued for not obey procedure.
TY!
Do a search warrant have to have a name or description of the suspect of who’s house is being searched ?
What If they confiscate something not all the search warrant can you still be charged
Depends, was whatever you are talking about in plain view? Could the officer by his/her knowledge, training, and experience articulate why what he/she seized was contraband? That is a good topic for another day.
When does a search warrant expire or whats the time frame from when the judge signs it to the time its no longer good or does it expire and when they do come in and u ask for the warrant and they refuse to give it to us so is that wrong or no i dont understand
It varies. Usually it is a "reasonable" amount of time. Basically, the info can't be allowed to become stale.
Bell v. Clapp is not controlling law in any jurisdiction but New York - ergo, not a particularly helpful case to look to overall.
Can police search other residents rooms and belongings if not listed on the warrant ? If firearm is found in another resident room was the arrest legal
No because then you are violating that other persons rights
Search warrants are handed out like candy. And all they state is that the police can search for "evidence of a crime".
The new thing with search warrants they’re doing is listing items that they are searching for and (anything that is found that can or constitute a crime)
That's a no brainer. If my warrant specifies looking for illegal firearms and I open a closet and find a dead body, what do you want me to do? This obviously was not in plain view. It may or may not be a murder victim. However, I just can't close the closet and say not illegal firearms there.
It is easy to understand from your presentation that the American Bar Association through its members, the attorneys and judges, have taken our Bill Of Rights and made decisions to protect your own and to turn every issue of justice into a continual argument where the members of the Bar assure themselves of fortune on the backs of the People.
I wish the people would see that just like a divorce where the attorneys try to create a conflict between the parties, as to increase their billable hours, the same thing happens in our system of justice here in the USA. Considering the members of the Bar also infiltrate our Congress, it is no wonder our Country is going down the rat hole. Listening to you I think you must be brainwashed because you don't sound like my idea of an American.
This is why the people have the power to amend the state constitution by referendum to explicitly overrule judge-made law. It is also why some states have a provision that requires appellate court judges to be confirmed by popular vote of the people every so many years in order to retain office.
@@Harlem55 My new cry... Google 1 per 30,000 or go to thirty-thousand.org
@@timsteinkamp2245 Excellent piece of Jewry if i don't say so myself.
@@Harlem55 I don't understand the comment. What does the Jewish people have to do with the topic of search warrants and federal law? Is this supposed to be a slam?