A total lack of 4th amendment rights, if one is caught with drugs or kiddie porn

[speed]

I was researching a brief for my internship defending a woman who was caught in her office distributing metamphetimines. She got really screwed, her coworker turned her in to her boss, who called the DEA, who made a warrantless search and seizure, which was upheld by the district court.

In defending her, I have been researching all the relevant material out there. It seems if drugs or kiddie porn is involved, one relinquieses not only their right to privacy, but the DEA or police have a pathetically low standard for probable cause, and really any exigent circumstances that involve drugs justify a warrantless search.

SO what I am saying here, is that if the cops even suspect you have drugs- they can make not only a warrantless search, but they can use surveillance set up in your home or work, without any warrant to do so. Of course there are a few courts which disagree, but the vast majority will uphold any actions the DEA uses. So watch it people out there, I am amazed at the number of marijuana cases I have found.

Hey Poisongod- I understand you are the other asshole- i mean lawstudent here- what are your opinions on this?

 

[Doctor X]

Isn't it probable cause having the coworker report her?

 

[jimbobhickville]

I don't think that fits probable cause. From my understaning, probable cause only works if the cops witnessed something that made them suspect the individual. If the boss called it in, then they could have easily obtained a proper warrant. I might be wrong, but that's how I understand it.

It's almost as ludicrous as how few rights the accused have in a sexual harrasment case.

 

[BiatchGuy]

I think the drug war's pretty fucked up. It's just as fucked up that if someone were to say something like that in the media, they'd immediately be painted as a criminal-loving, hippie, America hater.



and don't even get me STARTED on this Iraq bullshit.