Greetings,
A few posts above this one, a fellow asked that if police find items not specifically mentioned/itemized on a search warrant could they confiscate it and charge a person for any illegality on it.
They answer is "YES".
The Supreme Court said so, I believe, just 2 years back, or was it 4? I am sorry I do not know for sure, nor do I have the reference...there are only so many 'specifics' I can keep in mind, and I'd rather know what the proper air pressure in my tires is, which check goes where, anniversary dates, etc., than specific legal case numbers.
The cause for this has sprung directly from drug enforcement and the "war against drugs". All too often, a search warrant would be issued to search a residence for drugs, and they would find no drugs but things like cash, guns, "too many computers" and expensive cars. Or a car would be stopped for speeding, the LEO would then notice the smell of pot, have reasonable cause, and search the vehicle, find no pot (let us say the people tossed it out the window), and find a bag of coke.
Now, does the LEO have the right to arrest the driver for possession/intent to distribute/etc. since he was originally pulled over for speeding? Some fellow said "NO, you can't do that." The case went up the ladder of justice, and it was ruled that if during the execution of a search warrant something else (illegal) is found, that then can become the point on which the person is charged/arrested.
Before someone gets on my back about guns not equaling drugs, let me say I agree to that point.
It is interesting to see how this fear of drugs and crooks and "evil" has lead to where we are now.
Duncan
[This message has been edited by Duncan (edited October 08, 1999).]