Posted on 04/25/2006 10:39:28 AM PDT by Graybeard58
WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court considered Monday whether police officers should have knocked to announce their presence when responding to complaints about a party so loud that authorities could not be heard shouting their presence.
Several justices seemed ready to side with four Brigham City, Utah, police officers who tried in vain to get the attention of people at a July 2001 party before entering the home without a warrant and screaming, "Police!"
The officers entered the home after they peeked through a window and saw a teenager, who was being restrained by four adults, throw a punch that drew blood.
According to court filings, the police tried to get the attention of people at the party at the front of the house before walking to the backyard, where they saw two intoxicated teenagers.
Once on the back porch, an officer yelled, "Police," at a screen door. When he received no response, he opened the door, took a few steps inside and screamed, "Police," again.
"Why isn't screaming, 'Police,' enough?" asked Justice Antonin Scalia, who described requiring more as "absurd."
Once the adults realized the officers were inside the house, they allegedly became abusive and were charged with disopderly conduct, intoxication and contributing to the delinquency of a minor -- all misdemeanors.
Boy, them LDS parties in Utah have really become liberal?
Dang, I wouldn't want to be charged with "disopderly conduct".
That would be bad.
That is probable cause. If the incident was in plain sight and the cops saw it then they can enter.
I can remember being disopderly on a couple of occasions. ;)
I think the crimes would have to be felonies.
This one is a no-brainer. The Supreme Court took this case only because the Utah Supreme Court said the cops had to leave and get a warrant. I expect a 9-0 reversal.
ping
I have a feeling the Ninth Circuit is the cause for this review. To the rest of us it's obvious.
I don't know about that, but the situation is more complicated than it appears. What's to keep a cop to claim "Hey, I identified myself but no one heard me" in order to justify an otherwise bad bust?
Well, let's see. The party-throwers were so loud that they not only violated their neighbors' peace and quiet, but also made it impossible for the police to make their presence known outside the house. IMO the party-throwers lost their own right to privacy by so imposing on their neighbors.
And why do dyslexic hippies became Mormons?
Define a bad bust.
What's to keep the thugs from turning their music up all the way to keep the law from being enforced?
Once they observed a crime being committed, there was no need for a warrant.
If I remember correctly, they were responding to a crime in progress (excessive noise or something).
You know which way this case is going. If a cop has to be heard prior to entry, it's just going to be a license to have really noisy parties. "Hey man, turn up the music so we can't hear the cops when they come!"
Uh - the same thing that keeps him from robbing a bank.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.