Since it is a world cup year we have decided to shift our focus from the law to something more important: Association Football (or soccer). We are going to provide discussion and analysis regarding the most exciting games during the World Cup. First up, Brazil vs. Croatia on June 12, 2014.
The law evolves along with technology. For example, early strict liability law concerned non-domestic or exotic animals: an owner of a lion, bear, or other…
In Navarette, the United States Supreme Court recently held that an anonymous informant’s tip that a certain truck “ran her off the road” was sufficient to provide reasonable suspicion of DUI to support a traffic stop. The opinion is problematic as it will have far reaching implications in terms of providing law enforcement with minimal justification to intrude on persons freedom of movement.
A Minnesota appellate court recently appears to have claimed that the state may criminalize a person’s refusal to consent to a warrantless search if the officer could have hypothetically obtained a warrant. You can read the opinion here.
This is dangerous.
In part 1, we discussed what is required for law enforcement to make a warrantless entry into the home. The state must prove each of the following elements of the emergency aid exception to the warrant requirement:
- The police officer subjectively believed that someone likely needed assistance for health or safety concerns;
- A reasonable person in the same situation would similarly believe that there was need for assistance;
- There was a reasonable basis to associate the need for assistance with the place being searched;
- There is an imminent threat of substantial injury to persons or property;
- State agents must believe a specific person or persons or property are in need of immediate help for health or safety reasons
- The claimed emergency is not a mere pretext for an evidentiary search.
It seems like every time there is a terrible tragedy, a cliche of a light bulb suddenly lights up in every politician’s mind and a thought bubble materializes over each politician’s head that reads: “bingo… I got an ‘NEW’ idea… how about a BRAND NEW LAW law?” Unfortunately, this less than novel approach occurs year after year after year.
The result? Nothing. Nothing aside from placing more limitations on the freedoms of law abiding citizens.
For example, some politicians are still stuck on the idea of warrantless, suspicionless, random DUI checkpoints. While no one wants to be on the road with those that are impaired, certainly no one wants to be caught in an “artificial” traffic jam. And we do need to stop think about protecting and not sacrificing our constitutional freedoms.
For a person to be guilty of DUI he or she must “drive a vehicle within this state.” RCW 46.61.502. But what exactly constitutes “driving”…
Federal prosecutors and law enforcement dominate the prosecution of drug crimes. Conspiracy to Distribute Controlled Substance Indictments are their magic weapon in the war on drugs. Why? Simple: Mandatory Minimum Sentences. These draconian punishment tools are their stock in trade. Criminal defense attorneys, especially experienced criminal defense attorneys, have been accomplices in this miscarriage of justice, forced to play along with a system that treats due process and equal protection like annoying trifles. Here’s how it works…
Basic Admissibility Requirements for Breath Tests in Seattle, King County, Oak Harbor, Island County, Western Washington: Major law enforcement campaigns exist to enforce DUI laws.…
Restore your right to possess firearms in King County, Seattle, Oak Harbor, Island County, and Western Washington. The legislature has provided a procedure so those…