Some of you reading this are lawyers, maybe even my co-workers, and will find (I think) this immediately interesting.
Others are not and will groan about a boring law post. Excuse me and the fact that I sort of erroneously assume that what I do is interesting to all (although that is immediately obvious if you ever go to dinner with me and I drone on about my cases...). Some may find it interesting for other reasons (ahem, a-put-out-your-joint, a-thanks).
But, for real... I think this is important for everyone.
The Supreme Court (of the US - the big cajunas!) is currently considering a case called State v. King, which comes from Kentucky.
In this case, Mr. King (and for traditional defense-attorney-effect, I'll call him by his first name, Hollis) - was minding his business in his apartment, with some buddies... and some drugs (weed and cocaine, in small amount, to be exact). The police were in his building, on unrelated business (chasing an alleged drug dealer, actually), and noticed the odor of burning cannabis coming from his apartment (uh, apparently someone forgot the towel under the door crack, hello???). So, the police knock, hear "noises that might indicate evidence is being destroyed" (could it be the infamously and poorly-timed toilet flush???) and knock his door down. You can guess the rest - but it didnt end so well for poor Hollis.
So, what? Well, the police did not have a warrant. In fact, they weren't even in the building for purposes of making contact with Hollis. But, under Kentucky law (and the same in Florida, I might add), if there's no warrant, the police can enter your home for "exigent circumstances" (some emergency -- like someone in danger, or evidence may be destroyed). Normally that is what the police are arguing in a toilet flush type case. HOWEVER - if the police create that emergency, they can't reap the benefits of it. In other words (hold on, because this is so circular, you may get dizzy), the police are arguing that they could hear what may be a person flushing evidence -- so if they wait to go and get a warrant, the evidence may be gone. But-- if they never would have knocked, you never would have known the police were there, and therefore never would have started flushing your drugs down the toilet -- and therefore, they can just go get their dang warrant.
Ok -- so, that's basically what the Kentucky Supreme Court found in Hollis' case: the police illegally entered into his apartment, violating his 4th amendment rights, and therefore making all evidence obtained inadmissible in court. The Supreme Court of the US, however, is being asked to reconsider that.
So, what does that mean?
Well, potentially, it could mean that an officer could break your door down if he smelled pot coming from your home... or, for people in my profession, more realistically, if he says he smells the odor of pot coming from your home. Relatively recently, the law changed to say that police could search a vehicle just for the odor of cannabis. After that, the number of officers who smelled the odor of cannabis in vehicles increased exponentially (in my experience, anyway). Many times, the odor of cannabis leads to the search of car where many things (some of them very illegal) are found... but none of them are cannabis. Interesting.
Ok, so I already have the lawyers (ok, criminal defense lawyers?) on my side. And I have those who may at times engage in illegal activities in their homes on my side. This is terrible.
But what about everyone else? How often do I hear the argument: who cares? If they're doing something illegal, they deserve whatever they get, and the police should do whatever they need to get that evidence.
Well, my friends, it's kind of like universal health care. You're against it until you need it.
In my line of work, I tend to hear about searches/seizures when they find something. But what about all of the times they dont? Is it ok with you that a police officer may be able to come into your homesweethome, without a warrant, without a reason, because they think they smell marijuana? because they think you are flushing drugs down the toilet (but maybe it's just diarrhea)?
Most troubling to me are the comments of the Honorable Justice Scalia, as he says with sarcasm, "taking advantage of the stupid criminals... that's terrible and unfair, isn't it"? Well... that is a pretty unfair thing to say, Justice Scalia (who, fyi, was appointed by President Ronald Reagan). I wonder, when do you figure was the last time Scalia was pulled over without reason, or his house was searched without a warrant?
(and for those of you who thought, "well maybe he doesnt commit crimes", I offer you this photo of the man we're talking about here):
(and for those of you who scoff at the idea of racial profiling and believe it doesn't exist, I hope you will someday invite me to your imaginary playland where puppies and rainbows occupy most of your time).
Anyway, to wrap this up: I take great issue with the disintegration of my Constitution, but obviously it directly affects my work. I just wish everyone understood how important it is for everyone to care about these issues -- perfectly-law-abiding or not. It is funny to me that many times those that harp on 2nd amendment rights (guns) and "patriotism" (with their own very limited definition of patriotism) are often the same people that laugh in the face of the 4th amendment (support it when you need it, universal healthcare, ahem). This is the Amendment that protects your home, your car, and even your body from invasion from the government - and hellooooo - that's a very big deal! And a justice of the Supreme Court of the United States has the cajones to say (on the record) that he doesnt feel bad about a violation of those sacred rights because the person they protect is a criminal???
I digress. It's hard to stand on this soapbox for too long in six inch heels.
The only thing I have left to say... it would be really a shame if those awesome "Welcome" mats that say "Show me your warrant" should become outdated and meaningless. I mean... the joke is just too good.
No comments:
Post a Comment