www.CVOHARLEY.com
CVO Social => In The News => Topic started by: porthole on January 10, 2018, 02:51:30 PM
-
Not suggesting that anyone here has ever been on the leading end of a chase :orange:
https://www.policeone.com/legal/articles/468811006-SCOTUS-to-hear-case-disputing-warrantless-motorcycle-search/?NewsletterID=468666044&utm_source=iContact&utm_medium=email&utm_content=TopNewsRelated2Title&utm_campaign=P1Member&cub_id=usr_0Aq0MZizB8YNAfcl (https://www.policeone.com/legal/articles/468811006-SCOTUS-to-hear-case-disputing-warrantless-motorcycle-search/?NewsletterID=468666044&utm_source=iContact&utm_medium=email&utm_content=TopNewsRelated2Title&utm_campaign=P1Member&cub_id=usr_0Aq0MZizB8YNAfcl)
-
That case stems from an incident that happened locally... going to be interesting.
:pumpkin:
Ride Safe,
Fired00d
:fireman:
-
Wonder what SCOTUS ruling will be? :nixweiss:
-
"The court will decide if the officer's search is covered by the automobile exception that allows police to search vehicles without a warrant if they have probable cause to believe they contain evidence of a crime."
Seems to me that it would extend to other vehicles such as motorcycles, boats, quads and so on. Time will tell.
-
"The court will decide if the officer's search is covered by the automobile exception that allows police to search vehicles without a warrant if they have probable cause to believe they contain evidence of a crime."
Seems to me that it would extend to other vehicles such as motorcycles, boats, quads and so on. Time will tell.
It seems to me that the officer was not searching the vehicle but instead searching for the vehicle. I also am interested in the outcome of this case.
Never be in a hurry to give up your rights. Far too many brave men and women have died to obtain and preserve them.
-
It seems to me that the officer was not searching the vehicle but instead searching for the vehicle. I also am interested in the outcome of this case.
Never be in a hurry to give up your rights. Far too many brave men and women have died to obtain and preserve them.
Excellent point, will be interesting.
-
Reading the article, I'm guessing they are challenging the fact the officer had to go onto private property and uncover the suspected bike without the proper authority. If it had been sitting out in plain view, there would be no need. Sorta like an officer opening a closed garage or shed checking a license plate on a suspected vehicle....ain't allowed without a warrant....suspected illegal activity or not. Cases get thrown out all the time for illegal search and seizure. Looking under a tarp may be a grey area but still.....
Not defending either party in this. We have laws for a reason but innocent until proven guilty doesn't seem to be popular these days.... :nixweiss:
-
Reading the article, I'm guessing they are challenging the fact the officer had to go onto private property and uncover the suspected bike without the proper authority. If it had been sitting out in plain view, there would be no need. Sorta like an officer opening a closed garage or shed checking a license plate on a suspected vehicle....ain't allowed without a warrant....suspected illegal activity or not. Cases get thrown out all the time for illegal search and seizure. Looking under a tarp would may be a grey area but still.....
Not defending either party in this. We have laws for a reason but innocent until proven guilty doesn't seem to be popular these days.... :nixweiss:
Good points. Am guessing the police will claim "hot pursuit" which allows an officer to purse a suspect onto private property. SCOTUS ruling here is well worth noting.
-
Unfortunately, the article is rather vague and where it gets tricky is whether the bike is in a garage or on the lawn, the tarp fully covered the bike and plate, etc.
The eye commits no trespass verses the reasonable expectation of privacy.
-
You can read more about the case here - Ryan Austin Collins v. Commonwealth of Virginia (http://caselaw.findlaw.com/va-supreme-court/1748177.html).
:pumpkin:
Ride Safe,
Fired00d
:fireman:
-
SCOTUS will rule against the po-po on this one, I believe. The warrantless exception applies to searching vehicles...not searching for them. It seems in this instance the search was of the residence, looking for the motorcycle. We'll see.