MIP, Hosting a party...

[HighImTom]

What is the name of your state? Oregon
I am a 19 year old college student. In october i had a party and was charged with hosting a party and an MIP. I obtained the police report, and here are some exerpts (summarized) from the report from the police:
Police cause: I could hear louse noise (People talking and yelling coming approx 150 feet away on blank street)

I Approached two males both appeared under 21

I asked <insert name> how much he consumed he said "i only had one beer." I asked the other kid, he said i dont know two beers..

So basically the cops had reason to believe that there was a party at my house and people were underage drinking. None of the kids they asked before they came to my house said they were drinking at my house. And none of the kids were in the actual house they were on the lawn.
Anyways, the police knocked on my door and asked me if i lived there. I said no. I told them i would go find someone who did live there and they refused to let me shut the door while i went to go get someone.
Heres some exerpts(summarized) from the report in the police's point of view. (Blank is me who lives in the house)

I asked blank (me) to come outside and he said no. I told him if he did not come outside i was going to come inside the residence. Blank told me "You cant come in here." I told blank he did not have the authority over the property since he did not live there. Blank told me "Well i do live here and you cant come inside until u get a warrant." I told blank he was under arrest for hosting a party for minors and told him to step outside of the residence. Blank began to step away from the doorwar. I stepped through the doorway and gained control over Blanks left arm. I placed my left hand on blanks arm and handcuffed him, and escorted him out of the house.

I guess my question is, can the police do this? Do they have the right to step into my house and grab and handcuff me without getting a warrant?

 

[CdwJava]

You can't be serious! You're committing a crime in their presence and you think they do NOT have the right to arrest you?

The actions as posted by you are perfectly lawful and proper.

Get an attorney. It's not likely that big a deal, but it's against the law to host a party where minors are served alcohol. Your behavior only exacerbated the problem. You likely face only a fine and possibly probation, though I suspect that the potential of jail time exists - even if it isn't likely.

So ...

I guess my question is, can the police do this? Do they have the right to step into my house and grab and handcuff me without getting a warrant?

The answer is: Yes, they do.

- Carl

 

[HighImTom]

The thing is minors weren't served alcohol at my house. Police never found a keg or any evidence the we were serving minors at my house. I told the police that from the begining he needed a warrant to come into my house. And he stepped through the door and arrested me. Are you sure they don't need a warrant? When i asked them to get one?

 

[CdwJava]

The thing is minors weren't served alcohol at my house. Police never found a keg or any evidence the we were serving minors at my house. I told the police that from the begining he needed a warrant to come into my house. And he stepped through the door and arrested me. Are you sure they don't need a warrant? When i asked them to get one?

Yes, I am sure. All that is needed for an arrest is probable cause to believe that a crime has been committed and the person arrested had committed the crime. It does not mean "proof beyond a reasonable doubt" and it is perfectly reasonable for an arrest to occur and the charges to later be dropped.

They did NOT need a warrant in this circumstance.

And if minors who had been drinking came from the house, that is likely all that is sufficient. Even if they brought their own alcohol, by your permitting them to be served, you are likely in violation of your state's laws on the subject. You would be in mine.

Now, if your contention is that the "party" was just one where already inebriated kids just happened to show up, then you may certainly present that as the case ... I doubt it will be believed, but it's always possible, I suppose.

What does your attorney say?

- Carl

 

[HighImTom]

My attorny said that she thought that the police had made a wrong move. She thinks that they need a warrant to come into my house. She wants me to plea not guilty and to make a motion to suppress the evidence from the point of the cop walking through my front door, so any evidence from that point cannot be used. She wanted to suppress the evidence then try and settle it out of court...

 

[CdwJava]

Well, good luck. But unless the officers had NO reason to come to your door or suspect that juveniles had been drinking there, I just don't see it being suppressed. But, Oregon law may be different than California's in this regard.

Basically, if any of the kids pointed out your place as being where they had been drinking they had good cause to be there. And if you were responsible for the party they had good cause to detain you and investigate further. But it is logical to assume that if kids are drinking in your yard (your property) that you are responsible.

I suppose they could have then arrested all the trespassers on your yard since you weren't responsible for them ... that would have gone over well.

But, since I am not privy to all the details - like the officers' side of the story, I can only guess.

Oh well. Maybe next time you won't have the party at your house.

- Carl

 

[HomeGuru]

My attorny said that she thought that the police had made a wrong move. She thinks that they need a warrant to come into my house. She wants me to plea not guilty and to make a motion to suppress the evidence from the point of the cop walking through my front door, so any evidence from that point cannot be used. She wanted to suppress the evidence then try and settle it out of court...

**A: your "attorny" is an idiot. Tell her to go back to law school.

 

[HighImTom]

Well according to the police report none of the kids said they had been drinking at my house, the police just asked them how much they had to drink tonite and they said a couple beers. I hope this goes over well cause i dont feel the punishment $1,250 dollar fine fits the crime in my situation. The police spent over 3 hours at my house when they could have been out stopping drunk drivers, or other crime.

I do appreciate all of your advice.

- tom

 

[CdwJava]

Well according to the police report none of the kids said they had been drinking at my house, the police just asked them how much they had to drink tonite and they said a couple beers. I hope this goes over well cause i dont feel the punishment $1,250 dollar fine fits the crime in my situation. The police spent over 3 hours at my house when they could have been out stopping drunk drivers, or other crime.

If you had not been allowing potential drunk drivers to liquor up at your place, they might have been able to.

Unless these drunk and/or drinking kids congregated on your property without your knowledge or consent, then you are responsible. If they gathered without your consent, ask how you can charge them all for trespassing.

- Carl

 

[Florid-aise]

Richards v. Wisconsin, 520 U.S. 385, 117 S.Ct. 1416, 137 L.Ed. 2d 615 (1997), where the Court held that “‘no-knock’ entries are justified when police officers have a ‘reasonable suspicion’ that knocking and announcing their presence before entering would be ‘dangerous or futile, or ... inhibit the effective investigation of the crime.’” This case focused on the question of whether an otherwise valid entry without knocking, would be made invalid by the fact that property was destroyed. The Court ruled that no higher standard is required even if the entry results in the destruction of property. United States v. Ramirez, 523 U.S. 65, 118 S.Ct. 992, 140 L.Ed.2d 191 (1998).

A search may be constitutionally defective if officers enter the dwelling without announcing, but circumstances may show that unannounced entry was reasonable. The Court named three examples: (1) an escaped prisoner has entered the premises; (2) announcement would endanger the officer; and (3) there is reason to believe that evidence will be destroyed. Wilson v. Arkansas, 514 U.S. 927, 115 S.Ct. 1914, 131 L.Ed.2d 976 (1995).

I am not a U.S. Supreme Court Justice. I presume that CdwJava, and HomeGuru are not Supreme Court Justice's either, but the Supreme Court Justices certainly are, aren't they?

Tell your "idiot" attorney to hold steadfast the the Fourth Amendment....and suppress, suppress, suppress.

 

[CdwJava]

Of course, you know, the case you cited had to do with the service of no-knock warrants and had nothing to do with on-view crimes and suspects. There are entirely different case laws that permit an on-view arrest for probable cause on the threshold of a residence, and even to enter a home to make the arrest.

Try again.

Oh, and if we want to play the case law game, I'll play ... I just have to get to the office and I can post all sorts of things.

- Carl

 

[HighImTom]

I wish someone could find the actual oregon law cause i can't..

 

[Florid-aise]

Of course, you know, the case you cited had to do with the service of no-knock warrants and had nothing to do with on-view crimes and suspects. There are entirely different case laws that permit an on-view arrest for probable cause on the threshold of a residence, and even to enter a home to make the arrest.

Try again.

Oh, and if we want to play the case law game, I'll play ... I just have to get to the office and I can post all sorts of things.

- Carl

You are indeed correct - the "No Knock" warrant service.



Just as I am sure that you know all too well, just how thick a "soup", the legalese of the Fourth Amendment is; with you being a career officer and all.
(Having seen your fair share of it's operation).

I am just as certain, that the poster's defense attorney, will have to mire through that soup.

You must believe that it is sometimes best to have an opposing opinion which forces one to think.

Highlm Tom, best advice you can get is get with your attorney and get your attorney's advice. The only one in the "soup" so far is you are concerned for your individual issues...oddly enough, is you.

 

[Rhubarb297]

My attorny said that she thought that the police had made a wrong move. She thinks that they need a warrant to come into my house. She wants me to plea not guilty and to make a motion to suppress the evidence from the point of the cop walking through my front door, so any evidence from that point cannot be used. She wanted to suppress the evidence then try and settle it out of court...

No the police officers don't have some right just to walk into your home and arrest you. Generally an arrest warrant is only required if one is in his or her home. But you said you were in your home. Probably the bigger problem is the seizure of evidence. Searches incident to a valid arrest are okay. But even if it's a valid arrest, that doesn't give them a license to go through your home picking up evidence. Now evidence that is in plain view where police officers are allowed to be, that's fair game.

I would bet though there is more to this story. Cops screw up a lot, but this would be an awfully big one. I doubt they would agree with your facts that led to the above legal conclusion. And I have to say you put yourself in the position you were so people on here aren't going to have a lot of sympathy.