SoylentNews

US Supreme Court Increases Police Search Powers

posted by Dopefish on Friday February 28 2014, @06:00PM   
from the freedom-is-not-free dept.

GungnirSniper writes "By a six to three vote, the US Supreme Court has ruled police may enter a home if one occupant allows it even after another previously did not consent.

In the decision on Tuesday in Fernandez v. California, the Court determined since the suspect, Walter Fernandez, was removed from the home and arrested, his live-in girlfriend's consent to search was enough. The Court had addressed a similar case in 2006 in Georgia v. Randolph, but found that since the suspect was still in the home and against the search, it should have kept authorities from entering.

RT.com notes "Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg joined in the minority by Justices Kagan and Sotomayor, marking a gender divide among the Justices in the case wrote the dissenting opinion, calling the decision a blow to the Fourth Amendment, which prohibits 'unreasonable searches and seizures.'"

Could this lead to police arresting people objecting to searches to remove the need for warrants?"

• Re:Occupants (Score: 3, Informative) by rts008 on Friday February 28 2014, @09:44PM

  by rts008 (3001) on Friday February 28 2014, @09:44PM (#8812)

  While I agree with you in principal, that is not what happened here.

  There was no child abuse, and the cops were not called. They just showed up looking for suspects in a stabbing and robbery.

  FTA:

  In 2009, the Los Angeles Police Department sought suspect Walter Fernandez, believed to have stabbed someone in a violent gang robbery. When police first arrived at the suspect’s home, they heard yelling and screaming before Fernandez’s live-in girlfriend Roxanne Rojas answered the door, appearing “freshly bruised and bloody,†and with an infant in hand, according to argument recap by SCOTUSblog.

  Fernandez was spotted by police, and said, “Get out. I know my rights. You can’t come in.†Yet police arrested him on charges of domestic violence. Later, once Fernandez was out of the home, police asked Rojas for permission to conduct a search, which yielded evidence implicating Fernandez in the robbery.

  The Court’s decision justified the police actions, with Justice Samuel Alito writing the majority’s position.

  “A warrantless consent search is reasonable and thus consistent with the Fourth Amendment irrespective of the availability of a warrant,†Alito wrote. He added that “denying someone in Rojas’ position the right to allow the police to enter her home would also show disrespect for her independence.â€...[...]... “Our opinion in Randolph took great pains to emphasize that its holding was limited to situations in which the objecting occupant is physically present,†he wrote. “We therefore refuse to extend Randolph to the very different situation in this case, where consent was provided by an abused woman well after her male partner had been removed from the apartment they shared.â€

  That's a little bit of a different situation, IMO.

  This case is exactly why we have trials and make attempts to make judicial systems fair, instead of just having laws and executioners.

  Sometimes things are not binary/black or white...there are a lot of grey areas in there you have to address.

  After hitting preview, I have to ask: "Where is proper unicode support, already?" WTF??!!?? Come on...

  Parent

  Starting Score:	1		point
  Moderation		+2
  Informative=2, Total=2
  Extra 'Informative' Modifier		0
  Total Score:		3