Legal Search and Seizure?

[napanix]

My boyfriend is on probation for what is considered a 'joke' in this town and was recently visited at home by his probation officer and a deputy. They knocked, barged in and immediately began searching his house. These were the applicable Order of Conditions of Probation/Suspension from the Judge: (in my shortened version)
1. Defendant to pay court costs.
2. Shall remain in state.
3. Cooperation with law in disclosure of evidence to crime convicted for.
4. Drug Rehab if needed.
5. Periodic blood alcohol/drug test.
6. Defendant shall permit the P.O. to perform unannounced visitation at his place of employment, home, or elsewhere.
7. Answer all reasonable inquirites from court.
8. No consorting with known felons.
9. Forfeiture of firearms.
10. Not violate any laws.
11. Support dependents.
12. Known felons again.
13. No alcohol or bars.
My question is: Were the P.O. and deputy legal to come in and search the premises?
My boyfriend is in jail over this and an expedient answer would be greatly appreciated.

 

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by napanix:
My boyfriend is on probation for what is considered a 'joke' in this town and was recently visited at home by his probation officer and a deputy. They knocked, barged in and immediately began searching his house. These were the applicable Order of Conditions of Probation/Suspension from the Judge: (in my shortened version)
1. Defendant to pay court costs.
2. Shall remain in state.
3. Cooperation with law in disclosure of evidence to crime convicted for.
4. Drug Rehab if needed.
5. Periodic blood alcohol/drug test.
6. Defendant shall permit the P.O. to perform unannounced visitation at his place of employment, home, or elsewhere.
7. Answer all reasonable inquirites from court.
8. No consorting with known felons.
9. Forfeiture of firearms.
10. Not violate any laws.
11. Support dependents.
12. Known felons again.
13. No alcohol or bars.
My question is: Were the P.O. and deputy legal to come in and search the premises?
My boyfriend is in jail over this and an expedient answer would be greatly appreciated.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


My response:

Looks like he got popped under #6. What did they find in the search?

IAAL



------------------
By reading the “Response” to your question or comment, you agree that: The opinions expressed herein by "I AM ALWAYS LIABLE" are designed to provide educational information only and are not intended to, nor do they, offer legal advice. Opinions expressed to you in this site are not intended to, nor does it, create an attorney-client relationship, nor does it constitute legal advice to any person reviewing such information. No electronic communication with "I AM ALWAYS LIABLE," on its own, will generate an attorney-client relationship, nor will it be considered an attorney-client privileged communication. You further agree that you will obtain your own attorney's advice and counsel for your questions responded to herein by "I AM ALWAYS LIABLE."

 

[napanix]

They found a meth lab...supposedly....I have been at this house for years and have never had any inclination of any meth lab but here in Clinton, Arkansas the law is not quite on the up and up. They have wanted him for years because he is so outspoken on legalizing marijuana.
But under #6, it says they can have an unannounced VISITATION...does that mean search and seizure?

 

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by napanix:
They found a meth lab...supposedly....I have been at this house for years and have never had any inclination of any meth lab but here in Clinton, Arkansas the law is not quite on the up and up. They have wanted him for years because he is so outspoken on legalizing marijuana.
But under #6, it says they can have an unannounced VISITATION...does that mean search and seizure? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


My response:

When you visit someone, you usually go into their home. In this case, he has forfeited his Constitutional rights and, in this instance, a "visit" means they knock and immediately enter. A methamphetamine lab is always in plain view. Since you weren't there at the time of his re-arrest, you have no idea whether the lab was there or not, do you? Just a side note, and I know it's none of my business, but this guy seems to continuously get into trouble. Is he really the guy of your dreams? Because, this scenario is going to repeat itself many times over his life, and it's going to be very tiresome for you. Don't you deserve something far better?

IAAL




------------------
By reading the “Response” to your question or comment, you agree that: The opinions expressed herein by "I AM ALWAYS LIABLE" are designed to provide educational information only and are not intended to, nor do they, offer legal advice. Opinions expressed to you in this site are not intended to, nor does it, create an attorney-client relationship, nor does it constitute legal advice to any person reviewing such information. No electronic communication with "I AM ALWAYS LIABLE," on its own, will generate an attorney-client relationship, nor will it be considered an attorney-client privileged communication. You further agree that you will obtain your own attorney's advice and counsel for your questions responded to herein by "I AM ALWAYS LIABLE."

 

[napanix]

I have another question relating to this same case. The reason he is on probation is because he protected me from domestic violence by shooting a gun over my ex's head. He was convicted of manufacturing pot in 1985 and was expunged under act 378 of 1975, which supposedly at that time, made him NOT a felon. His case was dismissed/expunged in 1990. He could say honestly that he was not a felon and his civil rights were restored. But the law changed in 1995....so from 1990-1995 he was NOT a felon and from 1995 til now, he is and can't have a firearm. NEVER INFORMED of this law either.
Anyway, if he takes his expungement case to the supreme court and wins, will all resultant charges have to be dropped since it was the P.O. from those charges that had him searched?

 

[napanix]

And to answer your question...yes I was there when they showed up. No meth lab was there that I saw. If it was in his shed outside, then I wouldn't have seen it. No, he isn't the man of my dreams but a lifelong friend. What can we do?

 

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by napanix:
I have another question relating to this same case. The reason he is on probation is because he protected me from domestic violence by shooting a gun over my ex's head. He was convicted of manufacturing pot in 1985 and was expunged under act 378 of 1975, which supposedly at that time, made him NOT a felon. His case was dismissed/expunged in 1990. He could say honestly that he was not a felon and his civil rights were restored. But the law changed in 1995....so from 1990-1995 he was NOT a felon and from 1995 til now, he is and can't have a firearm. NEVER INFORMED of this law either.
Anyway, if he takes his expungement case to the supreme court and wins, will all resultant charges have to be dropped since it was the P.O. from those charges that had him searched?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


My response:

This is somewhat of a novel question. The reason I say that is because only once have I seen the question; e.g., being convicted and getting one sentence, then the law changes, and sentence is reduced, and then the law changes again, and the original sentence is resumed. In that instance, many years ago, the Supreme Court of California on appeal, did, in fact, overturn the final sentence, and reverted the sentence to the lowered term. However, please understand, that at that time, California was a liberal State and we had very liberal State Supreme Court Justices. With the winds of political change (and you know that's so), it is doubtful that a "conservative" court would see it that way, and maintain the status quo.

While today's climate may be on the conservative, "law and order" side, it may still be better to try, then not having tried at all.

I wish I could give you more concrete ideas, but it is extremely difficult to predict such matters.

Best of fortune to you and your boyfriend,

IAAL



------------------
By reading the “Response” to your question or comment, you agree that: The opinions expressed herein by "I AM ALWAYS LIABLE" are designed to provide educational information only and are not intended to, nor do they, offer legal advice. Opinions expressed to you in this site are not intended to, nor does it, create an attorney-client relationship, nor does it constitute legal advice to any person reviewing such information. No electronic communication with "I AM ALWAYS LIABLE," on its own, will generate an attorney-client relationship, nor will it be considered an attorney-client privileged communication. You further agree that you will obtain your own attorney's advice and counsel for your questions responded to herein by "I AM ALWAYS LIABLE."