May officers detain visitors during probation searches?

[CdwJava]

It was also said: “While speaking with probationer at the front door, the deputies determined that a guest was also in the house.”

It was not said how this was determined. The actions or words of the guest might have given the police cause to detain him.

More than likely, they simply asked him to step outside while they conducted a search and asked him who he was. That's how it USUALLY goes down.

Here is a link to an article from Time on California’s state shelter-in-place order, and what it means for Californians:
https://time.com/5806477/what-is-shelter-in-place/

Which fails to point out that there is very questionable legal authority to lock people down in their homes. Arguably, neither state state nor local governments possess such authority. Most of the legal opinions I am seeing seem to agree that there is little to know legal authority to compel people to remain inside or not to gather where they otherwise have a lawful right to gather. That is not to say that such disregarding the guidelines is wise, only that the government lacks the authority to lock them down. Business, public venues, there is legal authority there - at least for state and local government in CA. But, locking people in their homes? Nope. They can claim to make it criminal all they want, but I think all any potential criminal filings will do will be to draw lawsuits and dismissals in FOJ when/if they ever get filed in the first place.

 

[CdwJava]

This latest question was sort of addressed already but I can say with some certainty that the probationer and his guest both violated the terms of their respective probations.

If you are referring to their associating together, I'm not so sure ... not all terms of probation prohibit contact with other probationers. In fact, most tend not to. In my experience PAROLE conditions are far more likely to contain such a provision than probation terms. PRCS can be a mixed bag and will depend on the nature of the offense and the offender. It has been a while since I have come across a probationer here who has had a restriction against associating with other probationers. Obviously, we cannot say whether one or both of these folks did violate the terms of their probation (since we know nothing about the details or the respective terms of their supervised release) in one way or another, so, I will concede that it is possible. Perhaps the OP can enlighten us as to whether either of them were arrested or told they were in violation and would face some future penalty?

Oops! Sorry - my bad. Missed that it was in reference to the deleted thread elsewhere about the sales or possession of dope. In that case, yeah, they almost certainly both were in violation!

 

[quincy]

If you are referring to their associating together, I'm not so sure ... not all terms of probation prohibit contact with other probationers. In fact, most tend not to. In my experience PAROLE conditions are far more likely to contain such a provision than probation terms. PRCS can be a mixed bag and will depend on the nature of the offense and the offender. It has been a while since I have come across a probationer here who has had a restriction against associating with other probationers. Obviously, we cannot say whether one or both of these folks did violate the terms of their probation (since we know nothing about the details or the respective terms of their supervised release) in one way or another, so, I will concede that it is possible. Perhaps the OP can enlighten us as to whether either of them were arrested or told they were in violation and would face some future penalty?

Oops! Sorry - my bad. Missed that it was in reference to the deleted thread elsewhere about the sales or possession of dope. In that case, yeah, they almost certainly both were in violation!

I was actually talking about the possession and sale of drugs.

Some states are fining stay-at-home or curfew violators. Of course, with high unemployment, and people waiting on relief checks from the government, and with courts closed, the fines might be hard to collect.

Edit: Haha. I see that you noticed that.

Odd how I quoted your post before your edit ... and the edited part shows up crossed out.

 

[CdwJava]

I was actually talking about the possession and sale of drugs.

Some states are fining stay-at-home or curfew violators. Of course, with high unemployment, and people waiting on relief checks from the government, and with courts closed, the fines might be hard to collect.

Edit: Haha. I see that you noticed that.

Odd how I quoted your post before your edit ... and the edited part shows up crossed out.

You were probably replying as I was editing. Maybe. Either way, my bad.

I suspect that what we may see, in the end, is a high volume of dismissed cases much like we did in the case of similar violations during the Rodney King Riots in 1992. Then, the state and local government had firm ground to lock people down and establish curfews, and even then they dismissed most of those cases. These current stay at home orders (at least under CA law) are on sketchy grounds so I'd be surprised if any of them get filed down the road.

 

[quincy]

You were probably replying as I was editing. Maybe. Either way, my bad.

I suspect that what we may see, in the end, is a high volume of dismissed cases much like we did in the case of similar violations during the Rodney King Riots in 1992. Then, the state and local government had firm ground to lock people down and establish curfews, and even then they dismissed most of those cases. These current stay at home orders (at least under CA law) are on sketchy grounds so I'd be surprised if any of them get filed down the road.

Law enforcement officers in southeastern Michigan (departments of which have been hit tragically hard by the virus) are handing out warnings rather than tickets for all but the most serious of crimes (and, in Michigan, that includes domestic violence) and nonviolent offenders are being released early from jails and prisons.

Weird times.

 

[CdwJava]

Law enforcement officers in southeastern Michigan (departments of which have been hit tragically hard by the virus) are handing out warnings rather than tickets for all but the most serious of crimes (and, in Michigan, that includes domestic violence) and nonviolent offenders are being released early from jails and prisons.

Weird times.

Yep. It's the same here. Scary part is that we don't really have low level offenders in jail here anymore, so they're letting out some pretty serious criminals. Though, I am surprised that we have not yet had reports of serious spikes in crime. Yet. Could be that with all the victims mostly staying at home, there are fewer targets and more witnesses.

 

[quincy]

Yep. It's the same here. Scary part is that we don't really have low level offenders in jail here anymore, so they're letting out some pretty serious criminals. Though, I am surprised that we have not yet had reports of serious spikes in crime. Yet. Could be that with all the victims mostly staying at home, there are fewer targets and more witnesses.

It seems there is less crime here, too. I can’t explain it.

 

[Just Blue]

https://www.chicagotribune.com/coronavirus/ct-coronavirus-chicago-police-new-crime-stats-20200331-utnr2apdtbdzhagsehlzvq4lvi-story.html

https://ktiv.com/2020/03/31/scpd-looks-at-crime-rights-amid-covid-19-pandemic/

https://abc7ny.com/nypd-crime-statistics-new-york-city-coronavirus-nyc/6071137/

https://www.ktnv.com/news/crime/drop-in-crime-in-las-vegas-during-covid-19-pandemic

 

[CdwJava]

However, I am afraid that the longer this goes on, these temporary downward spikes may edge back up. Additionally, people will get stressed and antsy as they remain cooped up. Alcohol and/or drug use in enforced close proximity coupled with stress over money and future employment - and potential to get infected - may drive these numbers upward. When that happens, we'd better be out of the social separation phase of things, or you could see violent offenders essentially cited and released back into the environment that spawned the problem to begin with.

 

[quincy]

However, I am afraid that the longer this goes on, these temporary downward spikes may edge back up. Additionally, people will get stressed and antsy as they remain cooped up. Alcohol and/or drug use in enforced close proximity coupled with stress over money and future employment - and potential to get infected - may drive these numbers upward. When that happens, we'd better be out of the social separation phase of things, or you could see violent offenders essentially cited and released back into the environment that spawned the problem to begin with.

Alcohol sales apparently are up so, yes, we could see the type of crimes reported change a bit.

But the current reduction in overall crime rates (as noted in the articles linked to by Blue) is at least for now one upside to a pandemic that has seen few upsides.

 

[CdwJava]

Alcohol sales apparently are up so, yes, we could see the type of crimes reported change a bit.

But the current reduction in overall crime rates (as noted in the articles linked to by Blue) is at least for now one upside to a pandemic that has seen few upsides.

Of course, we also saw crime flatline during the RK Riots as well ... but, THAT had something to do with all the cops and National Guard troops on every corner. (Ah, those days bring back memories ... not necessarily good ones ...)

 

[quincy]

I guess we can always hope that the virus has caused a permanent reduction in crime.

 

[CdwJava]

I guess we can always hope that the virus has caused a permanent reduction in crime.

Permanent? I can't see how. But, I always hope and pray.

And then there is this story from Houston where crime appears to be UP over the past 2 weeks:

https://abc13.com/its-not-just-burglaries-that-went-up-in-houston-chief-says/6070955/?fbclid=IwAR3VC5BCoYjuf8B1aWFkQ6Tx5-B0teJ8ejMRVO6uBVe7iFdecQq8ftk_qdM

 

[quincy]

Permanent? I can't see how. But, I always hope and pray.

And then there is this story from Houston where crime appears to be UP over the past 2 weeks:

https://abc13.com/its-not-just-burglaries-that-went-up-in-houston-chief-says/6070955/?fbclid=IwAR3VC5BCoYjuf8B1aWFkQ6Tx5-B0teJ8ejMRVO6uBVe7iFdecQq8ftk_qdM

The Texas Governor delayed taking any action to keep people at home. That could be one reason.

 

[CdwJava]

The Texas Governor delayed taking any action to keep people at home. That could be one reason.

Harris County (includes Houston) had two weeks of closed businesses and venues, and one week of a stay at home order. So, a mixed bag.