Wonderful. So now I'm intimately responsible 100% of the time for anybody who shows up on my doorstep. If my scumbag brother-in-law comes over looking to borrow money, I stand to get my door kicked in, have my face shoved in my carpet with a knee on the back of my neck, and my house torn apart by the cops because I won't (can't) tell them "where the dope is". This isn't happening in Nazi Germany or the former USSR, it's happening right here. Very nice.
A crappy decision like the eminent domain one. What's next? Thoughtcrime?
Chill out, dude... the court ruled against the police!
More BS lies from cops. They tried this crap in FL. They figured they could test money for "traces" of cocaine in the 80's, and arrest those whose money had traces on it. Guess what, virtually ALL of the money in some places like Miami have coke traces on it. You'd never be able to track it to anybody. I am sick of cops being so unpatriotic and thinking they are better than everyone else.
The conviction should be thrown out. American currency will routinely show traces of drugs. Money passes through many hands...
Ok, that's one way to look at it.
Of course, why would the police be testing your doorknob, out of the hundreds of millions of doorknobs? They would have to have some reason to think that testing your doorknob would reveal something interesting.
The 4th amendment protected us from having people break into our houses and trash them looking for evidence they could use against us. Having a person walk up to my door just doesn't seem like much of a violation.
By this reasoning, a police officer shouldn't be allowed to ring my doorbell, since the doorbell is part of my house. Ringing the doorbell might cause me to come to the door, and my presence might provide clues, or I might be persuaded to let him in to look around -- so ringing without warrant to ring should be illegal.
I wonder who owns the outside door knobs in a condominium?
The 4th amendment was not intended to protect criminals from being caught. This is not a game. It was intended to minimize the inconvenience to citizens from law enforcement activities.
And I note that having found drugs on the door knob is not itself probably cause to invade your house. The information has to be taken to a judge, who can make the same judgment about the meaning of the evidence as he does already with other evidence. Surely judges realise that people touch door knobs, and would want some other information as to why it is rational that the drugs found are related to the house.
The poster has a bigger problem. If you really have a low-life druggie who comes to your house, if he sits in your living room for too long the police state can seize your house, without a trial, on the excuse that you harbored a drug addict. You would have to then go to court to prove that you had no idea he was a druggie. You probably won't win.
All that being said, it would seem prudent to get a judge to sign a warrant to do a swab test, rather than wait for the test to go to court.....
so will this work on a vehicle? if so *I* say we should see how many cops are "dealing drugs" out of their patrol cars.
I bought my car used (lo miles, great condition) from a rental car agency. What if some low life had smoked pot or used drugs or tranpsorted explosives, etc. in it and left traces and I got stopped by the police? What if they used one of those drug dogs? (and yes, I've had it cleaned and vacuumed, but still,..)
You could be in big trouble and expense because of someone elses behavior or actions. Same thing with your doorknobs and the outside of your house. How would you know if someone planted drugs etc. around the perimeter of your house or garage?
Amen I aam glad this was thrown out.
I believe that a few years ago a court ruled that recorded sounds from inside a home that were obtained from a device that analysed vibrations on a window were legally admissable.
" If my scumbag brother-in-law comes over looking to borrow money"
This is no joke. I came home one day to find one of my cousin's sons, who's spent a lot of time in jail and prison (mostly for being drunk, drugged and stupid) in the house talking on my phone, online on my computer (and had changed some of my settings and software) had helped himself to a $30 bottle of wine that was a gift to me, had rifled through my mom's medicine cabinet and taken all the meds left over from her nursing home and had just made himself at home. The house was locked when I left. He just removed a screen, opened a window and invited himself in. It meant nothing to him. I escorted him out the door to his truck (which he never finished paying for of course, sticking his father in law for the bill).
He was exhausting to be around. He never shut up, never stopped trying to manipulate or make you feel guilty for his self-induced "mistakes" and misfortune. He would just wear you down. He never shut up! In the old days, I'm sure people like him got shot, just to shut them up.
I could tell you a lot more stories about him and one of his brothers. It's like that Albert King song, "Born Under A Bad Sign", if he "didn't have bad luck, he wouldn't have any luck at all".
A critical element of this decision is the "sterile" cloth. If a practice like this had been allowed to stand, how long before pre-treated cloths start getting used? Don't think it can't happen, all it takes is one or two bad cops in a department.
Who was the dumbass judge who signed a warrant based on what is on someone's doorknob? That was the real criminal here.
As far as your brother in law goes, I wouldn't worry about you getting busted for something he does. The police need to have a suspicion that a crime has been committed to begin looking at you.
