|
This is a purely educational website. Nothing here is legal advice or creates or implies an attorney-client relationship. If you have a specific legal issue, PLEASE talk to a lawyer who practices where you live—laws vary from place to place, and how they're applied varies from courthouse to courthouse. Your local county bar association can probably refer someone who handles matters like yours.
By using this site, you agree that you are awesome. Use of this site also constitutes acceptance of its Terms of Service and Privacy Policies, which are known to medical science as a cure for insomnia.
It's best to keep all discussions in the comments. But if you really need to reach Nathan privately, go ahead and email him at n.e.burney@gmail.com. He won't mind.
THE ILLUSTRATED GUIDE TO LAW and the PEEKING JUSTICE logo are pretty damn cool trademarks and should probably be registered one of these days.
© Nathaniel Burney. All rights reserved, though they really open up once you get to know them.
|
|
There’s a typo- “…they’d have to show show that…”
Thanks for pointing that
that out! How’d I miss that?
Planning to do a version 2?
One of these days! There are so many little fixes I plan to get to once I have a moment. A little editing here, a little retcon there, some clearer illustrations…
Looks like you duplicated the word “show” in the next-to-last bubble. Great stuff in all!
If the police don’t need a warrant to perform a reasonable search, then why do they ever get one?
CYA, mostly. Getting a warrant means that a judge has already certified the existence of probable cause, so the search will be valid as long as the warrant is valid and the search is conducted according to said warrant.
Also, police generally don’t need a warrant in the case of a field search/arrest because there’s some element of urgency. If after conducting an investigation a detective wants to make an arrest or conduct a search, they will usually be required to get a warrant since that element of urgency doesn’t exist if one is back at the precinct.
I would imagine that many searches are considered reasonable if you have a warrant but unreasonable if you don’t.
Also, for most of its history the fourth amendment applied only to federal action, whereas most law enforcement was done by the states, so its scope was rather limited.
Probable cause means more likely than not? I had the impression that it was much lower than that.