Q&A: Did You Know Evidence Collected With an Invalid Search Warrant Is Admissible in Court?
Question by _______: Did you know evidence collected with an invalid search warrant is admissible in court?
Basically, the police used a search warrant to search a guy’s house. While searching the house they found some meth and a loaded gun. Turns out the warrant was 5 months old and no longer valid—the police had failed to properly update their databases.
The court now says that the charges stemming from the meth and loaded gun are valid despite the fact the evidence to prove that was collected during an illegal search and seizure. (Which is supposedly protected by the 4th amendment of the U.S. Constitution)
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090114/ap_on_go_su_co/scotus_evidence;_ylt=Aj0nJfEJIhPJp1i8YRaTu3Cpg9IF
“…But Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the court, said the evidence may be used “when police mistakes are the result of negligence such as that described here, rather than systemic error or reckless disregard of constitutional requirements.”
Justices Samuel Alito, Anthony Kennedy, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas sided with Roberts.
In a dissent for the other four justices, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said the ruling “leaves Herring, and others like him, with no remedy for violations of their constitutional rights.”
Islam…………..”There’s a difference between an egregious and willful violation of one’s rights and an unintended one resulting from a legitimate mistake.”
You are correct. The problem is WHO gets to make that distinction?? The court after the fact?? Constitutional rights protect the people from the govt. NOT the other way around. This is what we like to call a VERY slippery slope.
mouse…….
THEY ILLEGALLY SEARCHED HIS HOUSE!!!!
Now the supreme court says they can ILLEGALLY SEARCH YOUR HOUSE TOO………..as long as it’s an “honest mistake”.
America is fked…
Best answer:
Answer by whimsy
That is an absurd ruling…
___Thus, any illegal activity by law enforcement can be chalked up as a “mistake”…
In legal cases, we should always err on the side of caution. Releasing a criminal is a better option versus suspending all of our rights…
Add your own answer in the comments!