Illegal search??

[roccaazgyrl]

What is the name of your state? colorado
my boyfriend had a fta warrent and the bondsmen was watching our house to catch him. i had 2 friends over (1 male+1 fem) so my male friend went out to my car for me and im assuming thought he was my boyfriend.next thing i know there are cops at my doorsaying that they are here for my boyfriend and know that he is in the house, and they pushed past me into the house.so they found my boyfriend and proceeded to look around my house.there was paraphenalia laying around so they said they were calling a narcotics officer who could/would get a search warrent.the narc arrived w\o search warrent, and again stated she would get one.they proceeded to search in our bedroom, looked in dresser drawer and found some methamphetamines, i said it was mine. so they arrested me for possesion &boyfriend on warrents but they charged him with poss. of a controlled substance as well.all the while never obtaining a search warrent or my consent to search. is this search illegal??

 

[Pfaffing85690]

Aside from the fact that they found your boyfriend INSIDE the home why would you think they had no right to search.

Try to look up the legal idea "Harboring a fugitive" and it's ancillary issues.

The serach was legal and each and every person in the home could have been charged with felony harboring.

 

[Crazyhorse]

searches are illegal unless there is a warrant or a warrant exception.

a felony arrest warrant is justification for entering your house and arresting your bf only if the police have reasonable suspicion that he is on the premises. it sounds like the bondsman's tip led to reasonable suspicion on the part of the police.

reasonable suspicion is like being 51% sure of something.

so the cops were at least 51% sure that your boyfriend was there. whether or not he was there, they had the right to enter based on the felony arrest warrant + reasonable suspicion.

the drugs were seized under the Plain View Doctrine that came out of HORTON v. CALIFORNIA. the evidence is admissible if (1) it was immediately apparent that the item seized was contraband (2) the officers were lawfully present and (3) they had a right of access to the item seized.

Get a lawyer. Now. Good luck.

 

[roccaazgyrl]

the warrent was a misdemeanor traffic warrent not a felony. my boyfriend just pissed the bondsman off thats why he was so adament on arresting him. the drawer they found it in, they said they were going to get a warrant to search, then they searched anyways.

 

[Crazyhorse]

well any arrest warrant is justification to get into the house as long as they reasonably believe he is in there.

as for the search there is some ambiguity in the fact pattern.

CHIMEL v. CALIFORNIA allows for a search incident to a lawful arrest where the cops are allowed to search the arrestee and the area within his immediate control (grabbing area).

MARYLAND v. BUIE modified this "SILA" search to allow police to look in areas in the arrest room where the police believe someone reasonably believe someone might be hiding or in immediatly adjacent rooms where they reasonably believe someone might be able to assault the officers. this part of the search ONLY applies to areas where a person might be hiding.

was the drawer in your boyfriend's "grabbing area"? if it was, and they found it during a SILA search, then it would be admissible under the PLAIN VIEW doctrine. however, if they said they were going to get a search warrant... that would seem to indicate that they knew they were exceeding the allowable scope of their search and had time to get a warrant from a neutral and detached magistrate.

however... if something in the house gave them PROBABLE CAUSE to search the rest of the house... they MAY have had lawful accesss to the goodie drawer in question.

moral of the story: get a new boyfriend. next time it might be you.