08-29-2010, 04:30 AM
Hi,
No. Exigent circumstances is about not needing a warrant. It is very limited, usually requiring the perceived threat of injury or death of a third party. Probable cause is the justification for a police action, be it pulling over a car for irregular driving, stopping a person for unusual behavior, or getting a warrant. Notice that neither the car pulled over, nor the person stopped can be searched without either a warrant or some further probable cause. And even then, any evidence found can be dismissed. Except for exigent circumstances, a person or his property may not be searched without a warrant.
Nope. That isn't even covered by exigent circumstances. Cops can sit outside of an office, looking in through a window and see the suspect shoving paper through a shredder, and they just have to sit there until a warrant is issued. Now, on a TV show, they always come up with some sly trick to get around the law. But in reality, a first year public defender would get evidence obtained in that way excluded. And probably get the cops reprimanded.
What the DEA agents did is to forget, just as they inevitably do, that this isn't a banana republic (where they would be much more at home) and that we have a constitution, laws, and all that embarrassing and hindering paraphernalia interfering with their administration of semi-legal vigilantism.
Irrelevant, immaterial, and wrong. While warrants can take a while to get for non time critical issues, warrants can and typically are issued rapidly in the cases where time is critical. Warrants for the search of a residence where a suspect is believed to be (with probable cause), can and are produced in minutes. And once issued, the warrant can be acted on even if it has not physically arrived at the scene (I don't know if that's state or federal, so it might not apply everywhere).
No. At most he gave them probable cause to ask for a warrant. Even if those purchases were probable cause, that's all the DEA had a right to do. Whether or not that was probable cause is a topic we cannot really discuss in an intelligent manner without a lot more information.
Really? Have you looked at the statistics of the people in American prisons at all levels? The bulk of the inmates are there because of drug charges, and the bulk of them because of minor quantities.
Plus, your statement is nonsense. The implication is that if the cops take an interest in you, you must be guilty. And if they take a big interest in you, you must be very very guilty and you lose all your constitutional rights.
--Pete
(08-29-2010, 03:43 AM)Lissa Wrote: Probably cause is about not needing a warrant.
No. Exigent circumstances is about not needing a warrant. It is very limited, usually requiring the perceived threat of injury or death of a third party. Probable cause is the justification for a police action, be it pulling over a car for irregular driving, stopping a person for unusual behavior, or getting a warrant. Notice that neither the car pulled over, nor the person stopped can be searched without either a warrant or some further probable cause. And even then, any evidence found can be dismissed. Except for exigent circumstances, a person or his property may not be searched without a warrant.
Quote:The point of probable cause is that the law enforcement agency thinks that they will be unable to get the proof they need if they take the time to get the warrant. It's about acting on a reasonable suspision before the perpatrator has a chance to dispose of the evidence that proves their guilt.
Nope. That isn't even covered by exigent circumstances. Cops can sit outside of an office, looking in through a window and see the suspect shoving paper through a shredder, and they just have to sit there until a warrant is issued. Now, on a TV show, they always come up with some sly trick to get around the law. But in reality, a first year public defender would get evidence obtained in that way excluded. And probably get the cops reprimanded.
Quote:What the DEA agents did was act as quickly as they could because they thought that Juan Pineda would get rid of the evidence before they could get the warrant.
What the DEA agents did is to forget, just as they inevitably do, that this isn't a banana republic (where they would be much more at home) and that we have a constitution, laws, and all that embarrassing and hindering paraphernalia interfering with their administration of semi-legal vigilantism.
Quote:Given what I saw fifteen years ago while serving on a Federal Grand Jury while in Arizona, major cases took months to build their case and some of the warrants required to move forward took a month at times to have a judge hear the warrant.
Irrelevant, immaterial, and wrong. While warrants can take a while to get for non time critical issues, warrants can and typically are issued rapidly in the cases where time is critical. Warrants for the search of a residence where a suspect is believed to be (with probable cause), can and are produced in minutes. And once issued, the warrant can be acted on even if it has not physically arrived at the scene (I don't know if that's state or federal, so it might not apply everywhere).
Quote:While Pineda can argue all he wants that he was the subject to unreasonable search, he really wasn't, he gave DEA agents probable cause to pursue him due to what he purchased at stores.
No. At most he gave them probable cause to ask for a warrant. Even if those purchases were probable cause, that's all the DEA had a right to do. Whether or not that was probable cause is a topic we cannot really discuss in an intelligent manner without a lot more information.
Quote:And really, Juan had to be running a fairly large growth setup as DEA agents aren't going to go to these lengths when someone is growing a plant for their personal use.
Really? Have you looked at the statistics of the people in American prisons at all levels? The bulk of the inmates are there because of drug charges, and the bulk of them because of minor quantities.
Plus, your statement is nonsense. The implication is that if the cops take an interest in you, you must be guilty. And if they take a big interest in you, you must be very very guilty and you lose all your constitutional rights.
--Pete
How big was the aquarium in Noah's ark?