Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Arrest Warrant

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Arrest Warrant

    First off, im located in Hillsborough County in Florida, now, if someone has an arrest warrant and a person is "hiding" them by allowing them to stay at their place, could they get in trouble for that?

  • #2
    Thats true, now if the persons car is sitting outside in plain view, would that give them the same right to search as if you got pulled over and the officer smelled weed in your car?

    Comment


    • #3
      lol, well that cleared up an questions of smells, but what I ment was, if they know someone has a warrent, and they see their car at another persons residence, is that PC to believe they might be inside hiding, and allow them to search or is a SW still needed?

      Comment


      • #4
        .............................
        Last edited by Monkeybomb; 09-12-2008, 06:50 PM.
        The early bird may get the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.

        Comment


        • #5
          Monkeybomb, we try that out here, and I've just violated someone's constitutional right to be a crook.

          And yes, I could hook up the homeowner for aiding and abetting a fugitive.

          I thought the constitution applied everywhere???

          Comment


          • #6
            .................
            Last edited by Monkeybomb; 09-12-2008, 06:51 PM.
            The early bird may get the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.

            Comment


            • #7
              LEOs can only enter a house without permission to execute an arrest warrant if they reasonably believe the wanted person lives there, and they have a reasonable belief they are home. This is true in all fifty states, as states cannot give LEOs more authority than what the SC decides.

              In Florida, if the homeowner won't let you enter to get the wanted person, and after you convey to them they are harboring a wanted person, they can be charged with Accessory after the fact. (This only applies if they aren't husband wife; parent child; or related by “consanguinity.”)

              Comment


              • #8
                Steagald v. United States 451 U.S. 204, 101 S.Ct. 1642 (1981).

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by kyle bermingham View Post
                  In Florida, if the homeowner won't let you enter to get the wanted person, and after you convey to them they are harboring a wanted person, they can be charged with Accessory after the fact. (This only applies if they aren't husband wife; parent child; or related by “consanguinity.”)
                  huh?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    As a matter of fact even a bondsman can kick in a door to get a person with an FTA if they know they are there. That one did go to the Supreme court and was upheld as good.
                    The constitution only protects citizens from their government and not other citizens. A Bondsman is not an agent of the government, therefore there are no constitutional issues associated with their activities.
                    "I think it takes a particular coward to criticize procedures that you don't understand; particularly when they apply to places that you don't have the bravery to go" - Battalion Chief John Sullivan, FDNY

                    "Keep your booger hook off the bang switch!" - Rev1

                    "If you reload like old people f@ck, then you need to be behind something that stops bullets." - Blackdog F4i


                    IGNORE = since9, justme001, opencarry, bsd13, asullivan, okjoe, Patrick Sander, CJ616

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by FireCop604 View Post
                      The constitution only protects citizens from their government and not other citizens. A Bondsman is not an agent of the government, therefore there are no constitutional issues associated with their activities.
                      yes, but different states have different criminal on that. in one state it may be ok for the bondsman to do it, but in another it could be burglary and false imprisonment.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by luckydog View Post
                        huh?
                        I guess I could/should have been more specific. I am referring to a situation where the person with the arrest warrant doesn't live in the house, but happen to be there.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by FireCop604 View Post
                          The constitution only protects citizens from their government and not other citizens. A Bondsman is not an agent of the government, therefore there are no constitutional issues associated with their activities.
                          You are correct but criminal mischief and burglary charges could apply in some cases. If a bondsmen broke into a house claiming a person they were looking was there but in fact was not. And a wife, child ect was there Burglary charges may apply.
                          The early bird may get the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by kyle bermingham View Post
                            I guess I could/should have been more specific. I am referring to a situation where the person with the arrest warrant doesn't live in the house, but happen to be there.
                            And you are correct about a wanted person being in a house as opposed to living there for a warrantless entry.

                            There is some gray area as to the definition of where a person lives. Such as a fugitve staying in a hotel etc. Thats why I stated I usually err on the side of caution and get a warrant.
                            The early bird may get the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by kyle bermingham View Post
                              LEOs can only enter a house without permission to execute an arrest warrant if they reasonably believe the wanted person lives there, and they have a reasonable belief they are home.
                              What he said. The only thing I'll add is that regardless of where the person lives, the address on the warrant has to be the address you are entering. In other words, if the warrant address is 123 Main St. and you reasonably believe that the wanted crook lives at 177 Center St. and you reasonably believe he is inside the residence, you will need a search warrant to enter the 177 Center St. without consent or exigent circumstances to serve the arrest warrant. As has been posted, see Steagald.
                              Vir rationem suorum gestorum libenter reddit,
                              sive iustorum sive iniustorum.
                              Eventus horum non detrectat,
                              sed cum his cotidie vivit.

                              Comment

                              What's Going On

                              Collapse

                              There are currently 4092 users online. 126 members and 3966 guests.

                              Most users ever online was 19,482 at 11:44 AM on 09-29-2011.

                              Working...
                              X