SCOTUS Says Police May Break In If They Smell Marijuana

Discussion in 'Law and Justice System' started by MikeK, May 16, 2011.

  1. MikeK
    Online

    MikeK Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2010
    Messages:
    13,143
    Thanks Received:
    1,981
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    Brick, New Jersey
    Ratings:
    +3,703
    SCOTUS Okays Warrantless Search of Apartment that Smells of Dope.
    By Nathan Koppel. The Wall Street Journal. 5/16/11
    (Excerpt)

    In an 8-1 ruling, the Supreme Court today ruled that Kentucky police were okay to kick in the door of an apartment that smelled of pot and was suspected of harboring a drug suspect.

    The police did not have a warrant to enter the apartment, and it turns out the suspect who they were chasing was not in the apartment. But once inside the police found marijuana and cocaine in plain view and arrested one of the inhabitants.

    The Kentucky Supreme Court held that the search was illegal. But the Supremes reversed, holding that the police could enter the apartment without a warrant, because after they knocked on the door and announced their presence they heard noises inside that sounded as if drug-related evidence was about to be destroyed.

    “Exigent circumstances, including the need to prevent the destruction of evidence, permit police to conduct an otherwise permissible search without first obtaining a warrant,” Justice Samuel Alito wrote for the majority.


    Whole article here: SCOTUS Okays Warrantless Search of Apartment that Smells of Dope - Law Blog - WSJ


    This is another giant step forward in an ongoing effort to undermine the Fourth Amendment and move the United States closer to being a police state. No condition for error is mentioned so presumably there is no penalty for erroneous forced entry. What this essentially means is all the police need to do is say they smelled or thought they smelled marijuana and heard sounds of destruction of evidence it's okey for them to break down any door they choose. And if they find no marijuana they can simply say they were right about the sounds of destruction of evidence because it was flushed down the toilet.

    This is no longer America.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  2. Contumacious
    Offline

    Contumacious Radical Freedom

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2009
    Messages:
    17,072
    Thanks Received:
    1,469
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Location:
    Adjuntas, PR , USA
    Ratings:
    +3,851
    Fourth Amendment?

    What Fourth Amendment?

    .
     
  3. TheBrain
    Offline

    TheBrain BANNED

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2011
    Messages:
    3,014
    Thanks Received:
    237
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +237
    oh noes.............

    In other news, LEOs may enter your house without a warrant if hey hear your wife screaming as you beat the shit out her.
     
  4. JBeukema
    Offline

    JBeukema BANNED

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2009
    Messages:
    25,613
    Thanks Received:
    1,703
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    everywhere and nowhere
    Ratings:
    +1,705
    Hemp Incense

    So... what probable cause did they have to believe there was any marijuana present?
     
  5. xsited1
    Offline

    xsited1 Agent P

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    17,750
    Thanks Received:
    5,299
    Trophy Points:
    198
    Location:
    Little Rock, AR
    Ratings:
    +5,306
    I'm sure they'll be a silver-lining to this ruling. After all, Prohibition brought us NASCAR.
     
  6. JBeukema
    Offline

    JBeukema BANNED

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2009
    Messages:
    25,613
    Thanks Received:
    1,703
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    everywhere and nowhere
    Ratings:
    +1,705
    So this'll bring us competition booby trapping and pig-shooting?
     
  7. CrusaderFrank
    Online

    CrusaderFrank Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2009
    Messages:
    81,140
    Thanks Received:
    14,896
    Trophy Points:
    2,210
    Ratings:
    +36,837
    They would have broke into my sons room last night too
     
  8. Quantum Windbag
    Offline

    Quantum Windbag Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2010
    Messages:
    58,308
    Thanks Received:
    5,014
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +5,221
    That is not what they said. What they said is that the mere act of knocking on the door was not a violation of the 4th Amendment, and they sent the case back to the state to determine if, under the clarified rules, this amounts to exigent circumstances. I sometimes wonder why anyone thinks the WSJ is a conservative news source.
     
  9. bigrebnc1775
    Offline

    bigrebnc1775 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2010
    Messages:
    64,004
    Thanks Received:
    3,798
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Location:
    Kannapolis, N.C.
    Ratings:
    +4,830
    I am not up to any form of debate so I will just post a brief comment from the link

    Court: No right to resist illegal cop entry into home


    INDIANAPOLIS | Overturning a common law dating back to the English Magna Carta of 1215, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Hoosiers have no right to resist unlawful police entry into their homes.

    In a 3-2 decision, Justice Steven David writing for the court said if a police officer wants to enter a home for any reason or no reason at all, a homeowner cannot do anything to block the officer's entry.

    Court: No right to resist illegal cop entry into home
     
  10. Montrovant
    Online

    Montrovant Fuzzy bears!

    Joined:
    May 4, 2009
    Messages:
    11,238
    Thanks Received:
    1,810
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    Beyond the Veil
    Ratings:
    +3,329
    Did the fact the police believed the home harbored a criminal suspect play a part in the ruling?

    I ask because from the tone of the article and some of the replies, I'd think cops are going to be walking door to door sniffing for pot so they can start busting down doors.
     

Share This Page