What? The 4th Amendment was made applicable to the states in 1868 with the adoption of the 14th Amendment.
isn't it enough that one wants to defend their constitutional rights? I surely believe it is. I just believe absent proof of the violation, he has no chance of winning.
BOR said:
No, it was incorporated to apply to the states in 1949 in Wolf v. Colorado "by and through" the 14th AM. There are still some of the provisions of the Bill of Rights not applicable to the states.
Sure, but why would she want to spend $5k in attorney's fees to have a $50 violation thrown out? I'm obviously guessing at the figures, but I'd be surprised if the benefit is worth the cost.
what are your rights worth? It is more than the violation at stake here. Many municipal governments do things such as this appears to be and claim some BS immunity due to them being who they are. Personally, I applaud the guy for standing up for his rights.
what search? There are means that the information could have been obtained that were completely legal. Unless the OP can show that the information was obtained by illegal means, I believe he is not going to prevail. So, when there are legal and illegal means to have gained the same information, unless the OP can prove it was by the illegal methods, all he has is suspicion and accusation.
If he can afford the fight, that's great. I applaud him as well. I simply made sure that he knew that he wasn't in for a big pay day if he wins.
And again, if questioned, the burden will be on the government to prove that the information was obtained legally.
Not true but even if it were, do you really think the gov agent will not simply make up some legal method they claim to have used to obtain the info? Unless the OP can prove the evidence was not obtainable by any legal means, he will lose unless the gov agent admits to the illegal action.
Violations of one's civil rights are actionable beyond merely applying the exclusionary rule to the evidence obtained via an illegal search.
Of course it's true. The OP can state that there was no way that the inspector could have gotten the info without an illegal search. Do you really think the judge is going to say "prove it," rather than just ask the inspector how the information was obtained? And yes, the inspector could lie. He could lie regardless of who has the burden. Police can also lie in criminal cases. That doesn't mean evidence is never suppressed.
Yes. They can sue for their damages. I'm sure that will go well for the OP.
. he flew overhead in a plane.
yes I do because the accuser is responsible for proving their claim, not the opposite. In a civil suit, the onus is upon the plaintiff to prove their claim. The defendant does not have to prove they didn't do something.
I suspect there is no discovery in disputing a violation of a civil ordinance. He would most likely have to continue up the line a court or two before getting to the point of discovery.
anonymous complaints. So, the inspector says it was an anonymous complaint. We don't know if the inspector actually saw the tarp (although it would be reasonable to presume they did). Maybe they issue citations on anonymous complaints and simply figure the party will argue the citation if improper.1. The Division of Housing Services will accept anonymous complaints for exterior problems; Housing Services maintains confidentiality of the complainant’s identity. Interior complaints require your name, telephone number and address when reporting a violation. This is important if the need arises for additional information and allows City staff to contact you regarding the status of the investigation.
2.Please provide the address of the location of the violation to include street number, street name, specific location on the property. (For example: “Trash in the front yard of 123 Anywhere Street”
3.Please provide as complete and detailed description of the violation as you can. This information will assist City staff in conducting a thorough investigation.
Please state the exact text from the 4th Amendment that states that having ugly blue tarps is a right. This is the land of the free and home of the brave. It's also the land that I don't want my neighbors turning my neighborhood into a ghetto.
