Timeline for How is a plain-clothes officer entering your house not an unreasonable search?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
17 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 23, 2023 at 4:33 | vote | accept | robertspierre | ||
| Oct 23, 2023 at 4:31 | comment | added | robertspierre | @Flydog57 if you open the door to step outside, the LEO can put his foot on the doorstep as to leave the door open | |
| Oct 8, 2021 at 16:09 | comment | added | emory | @Flydog57 I do not think that is very good advice. The one time I answered the door for the police, the officer immediately stuck his foot in the door. I could not close the door without "assaulting" the officer, nor could I walk out the door w/out walking through him (both arrestable offenses). I think the best advice is to not open the door for strangers of any kind. If the officer at the door is not your personal friend then do not open the door. | |
| Oct 7, 2021 at 22:00 | answer | added | Lance | timeline score: -3 | |
| Oct 7, 2021 at 17:16 | comment | added | BCLC | What if it was a non-police officer instead who then reported to the police? | |
| Oct 7, 2021 at 0:48 | comment | added | Flydog57 | Not a lawyer, but I find this interesting. The two times an LEO showed up at my front door asking to talk, I followed the advice of every lawyer who's ever discussed this with me: I stepped outside onto the porch, closed the door behind me and had a conversation. This was all because the LEO was in uniform. If a random, unsuspicious looking person shows up at my door, I act differently. | |
| Oct 6, 2021 at 12:51 | comment | added | Issel | How is this a search in the first place? Anyone can ask to talk to your wife, or to enter your house. He could have done this in his off time. Even if it was done in his off time, plain sight rules would still apply. The officer wasn't performing a search, his wife could have spoken with the offiicer outside of the house. | |
| Oct 6, 2021 at 11:33 | comment | added | phoog | @vsz if there is any such country, I imagine that the police officer's not identifying himself would be a critical element in the analysis. | |
| Oct 6, 2021 at 10:41 | answer | added | mckenzm | timeline score: 3 | |
| Oct 6, 2021 at 6:10 | comment | added | vsz | @TigerGuy In that case the police didn't search for "evidence to be used", the criminal himself picked up the gun in plain sight. I don't know of any country where if someone was stupid enough to voluntarily show evidence to the police, the police wouldn't be able to use it due to "unreasonable search". Do you know of any country where people have the right of being immune to evidence they themselves present to the police? | |
| Oct 6, 2021 at 5:57 | history | edited | phoog | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
edited body; edited title
|
| Oct 6, 2021 at 2:59 | answer | added | reirab | timeline score: 35 | |
| Oct 5, 2021 at 17:18 | history | became hot network question | |||
| Oct 5, 2021 at 15:10 | comment | added | Tiger Guy | You should begin with the assumption that the 4th Amendment means nothing if cops are finding evidence to be used against "criminals." There are pleasant surprises when one might retain actual rights, but in the USA, expect courts to side with police. | |
| Oct 5, 2021 at 11:20 | history | edited | Trish |
edited tags
|
|
| Oct 5, 2021 at 10:20 | answer | added | motosubatsu | timeline score: 45 | |
| Oct 5, 2021 at 9:15 | history | asked | robertspierre | CC BY-SA 4.0 |