Court allows search and seizure in Virginia case

[Friday on my mind]

it is unconstitutional for an unreasonable search and seizure by the 4th amendment UNLESS they were granted a warrant

I wish it was so,but the final arbitrator of what is contitutional (the supreme court) has said many times otherwise.For a some time now probable cause was enough and no warrant has been needed.There is no question that this was an unreasonable search and and they did not have any probable cause to search him.What the supreme court is saying is even without that probable cause, the evidence they found should be allowed.That is a lot of power that they are giving police and they are just inviting more searches, just cause the police want too, with no real cause needed.

 

[ArabJames]

I wish it was so,but the final arbitrator of what is contitutional (the supreme court) has said many times otherwise.For a some time now probable cause was enough and no warrant has been needed.There is no question that this was an unreasonable search and and they did not have any probable cause to search him.What the supreme court is saying is even without that probable cause, the evidence they found should be allowed.That is a lot of power that they are giving police and they are just inviting more searches, just cause the police want too, with no real cause needed.

i was just playing what the easy way out of the case should be

but if there is probable cause, its okay
but did they find something they werent supposed to find which wasnt in clear view (breadbox rule)?

because if it is in visible view, its fair game in the case or for another crime