Is this all it takes to gat a search warrant?

[Earthmother]

What is the name of your state? WV

OK, so, two juveniles get pulled over this morning and the cops found some pot in their car. The juveniles make up a story about where it came from, and claim they purchased it from an individual who is actually in jail and has been for a month. They completely fabricate a story about where they have been, what they did, and what they have seen. Based on this alone, a search warrant is obtained and executed, the same day.
No one apparently bothered to check to see if the juveniles giving the bogus statement were credible, which should have been obvious if they would have checked...

Is it really that easy for the police to obtain a search warrant? This seems absurd. This basically means that anyone, whether you even know them or not, can say anything they like, true or not, and the next thing you know the cops are at your house with a warrant. I find it hard to believe that this is legitimate... Otherwise it would happen continuously. What if I get mad at my neighbor? I can just tell the police that I was at their house and saw......(fill in blank) and that is enough to get a warrant???? I REALLY don't understand the legal system.

[justalayman]

Does sound a bit suspect but I suspect the household searched belonged to a known drug dealer. The info merely backed up the suspicions they already had.

Doesn't make it right but should give you a bit of relief,,,,,,,unless you are a known drug dealer.

[tranquility]

All that is needed for a search warrant is probable cause.

The police will state the facts which they believe gives them probable cause to search in an affidavit which they will bring to a neutral and detached magistrate who will decide if PC is there or not.

It is entirely possible that two known people telling the police seperate but similar stories could give rise to probable cause. As Justalayman wrote, the police may already have had other suspicions regarding the place and that may have been added to the affidavit as well.

At the end of the day, as long as the police did not intentionally lie in the affidavit, the warrant is good. The judge did find probable cause and any other argument is moot.

[Some Random Guy]

The two who originally got pinched would be opening themselves to charges of false informing. This threat of legal action reduces the incidence of bogus searches as you have described.

However, it doesn't mean that the police an judge did anything wrong in believing them.

[Earthmother]

The thing that has me totally perplexed is that the individual who they claimed to have gone to see, and gotten the weed from is in jail already and has been for some time. Certainly the police or prosecuter could have/should have known this. It would have been extremely easy for them to find out if they did not. And this being the case, every single word of the statements made by the two juveniles whice was used to obtain the warrant was a lie, and that making the statements totally invalid. They could have discovered this EASILY without all the hullabaloo, time, man power, and distruction of property. The warrant specifically stated that a particular person was responsible, and his name was on the warrant in at least 5 places. Even tho he is in jail.The information used to obtain the warrant was ENTIRELY from these two juveniles. Nothing else.

[tranquility]

A warrant is presumed to be good.

All the facts you indicate are not really relevant as a judge has determined there was probable cause. Errors in the affidavit will not necessarily lead to invalidating the warrant.

If you want to fight the warrant, the usual areas to attack are:
1. The affidavit contained reckless or intentionally false statements. I don't believe the police have a duty to check if the person reffered to in the warrant was in jail, out of the country, dead or was otherwise unavailable at the time some person said he did something. Failue to check may be negligent, but we aren't looking for negligence but recklessness. If everything you've said is precisely true, you may have enough to request a "Franks" hearing. (The hearing to determine if the warrant is good.) I don't think so, but maybe. The level needed is a "substantial showing" and not proof. Proof comes once you get the hearing. If the officers did check and found that what you said was true (about being in jail at the time) and did not put that in the affidavit, then you'd be talking.

2. The warrant is facially overbroad or lacks sufficent particularity. Since you have provided no information here, we cannot judge. Rarely would an officer with experience in writing warrants make an error here.

3. Obvious lack of probable cause. That would not be the case here as the determination is what a reasonable officer would believe. From your facts, I think there was obvious probable cause.

4. Product of prior illegality. Nothing to indicate that here.

5. Manner of execution. Nothing to indicate that here.

6. Role of the magistrate. Nothing to indicate the magistrate was not neutral and detached--nothing here.

[Earthmother]

Comments made by the investigating officer in charge, upon his arrival, indicated that he, at least, knew that the individual listed on the warrant was not present, and none of the officers inquired as to where this individual was at the time. ALL of the officers expressed surprise later when they were told that the individual in question had been in jail for some time.

We are also talking about unnecessary and unprofessional destruction of property, possibly thousands of dollars worth, and plain and simple vandalism of items not in any way connected with what they were searching for.

We are ALSO talking about fabrication of evidence, in which the lead officer asked one of the other officers "how many", and then wrote down a significantly higher number than what he had just been told.

Yes, we are looking for a way to fight this.
And, no, no one was arrested or charged.
We live on the property that was searched.

[tranquility]

Comments made by the investigating officer in charge, upon his arrival, indicated that he, at least, knew that the individual listed on the warrant was not present, and none of the officers inquired as to where this individual was at the time. ALL of the officers expressed surprise later when they were told that the individual in question had been in jail for some time.

Nothing here is helpful to a warrant challenge.

We are also talking about unnecessary and unprofessional destruction of property, possibly thousands of dollars worth, and plain and simple vandalism of items not in any way connected with what they were searching for.

Nothing here is helpful to a warrant challenge, but may give rise to civil liability.

We are ALSO talking about fabrication of evidence, in which the lead officer asked one of the other officers "how many", and then wrote down a significantly higher number than what he had just been told.

Nothing here is helpful to a warrant challenge, but may give rise to a challenge to that specific evidence in court. You would need to *prove* this happened. Is the actual number that important? Trying to prove this will be an admission that the smaller number was found and may be evidence you knew what was being talked about.

[Shay-Pari'e]

Things have a way of comming back and biting you Earth Mother.

Your posting history is rather funny.

[Earthmother]

Originally Posted by Shay-Pari'e

Things have a way of comming back and biting you Earth Mother.

Your posting history is rather funny.

And you, Shay-Pari'e, are a troll and have no business posting here.

[Shay-Pari'e]

Originally Posted by Earthmother

And you, Shay-Pari'e, are a troll and have no business posting here.

You are a funny Hillbilly.

[Earthmother]

Originally Posted by Shay-Pari'e

You are a funny Hillbilly.

Maybe that's because I'm not from around here. Do you even know what a hillbilly is really like? They are extremely proud people. Some of them can't read and write. They mostly have alot of honor, but not much intellect. They rub snuff and eat too many fried foods. They hunt and they fight their chickens and drive either gas guzzling 4 wheel drives or old beat up cars held together with american flag decals. And I am not one of them. No matter how long I live here I'm seen as an outsider. My accent is wrong. Oh, and I'm not a biggot. But I am a hippy. Yay. Now, how about back on topic.

[Bretagne]

Back on topic:

The short answer to your question is yes. That is all that is necessary to get a search warrant. Tranquility's answer is accurate.

Search warrants are executed on the wrong property all the time. Often in a drug case, an informant (paid by the state) accidentally provides the wrong address. Or maybe the informant was just too high to remember what house he bought drugs in.

But the case law is very clear on the subject of the property damage caused by the entry. If anything is damaged (like if your door gets broken down) then the state has to reimburse you for those expenses. Just throwing all of your stuff around out of drawers, closets and the like won't really result in "damages". But if you have to repair a door or a window, make sure you get a bid or two from a carpenter about how much that is going to cost. If any couch cushions or pillows got torn up, estimate their replacement cost.

Then, see if you can get a consultation with a local personal injury attorney. This is kind out of a PI attorney's range of expertise, but essentially there is a tort involved and the case law is pretty obvious. Plus, many PI's will take cases on contingency if you cover the fees and overhead.

Sounds like something where a polite letter written by an attorney can get you some relief. But you're not going to get any special or punitive damages, just the cost of replacing your personal property which was damaged.