Officers accused of using home in wait for warrant

Boston Globe ^ | January 31, 2009 | Maria Cramer

[ellery]

Boston police are investigating allegations that officers who were assigned to guard the home of a homicide suspect remained inside his apartment, watching television and resting on the couch even before detectives obtained a search warrant.

On Tuesday night, seven hours after Christopher Jamison, 23, allegedly shot Anthony Perry, 22, in Jamaica Plain, officers went inside his Roxbury home and ordered his mother to leave.

After police looked through the apartment to be sure no one else was present, at least two officers remained inside most of the night without a warrant, said Ozell Hudson Jr., a Boston-based lawyer representing Jamison's mother.

When the mother returned to her apartment around noon Thursday, she saw two officers sitting on her couch, Hudson said. Police still had not obtained a search warrant.

"The manner in which this search was done was certainly contrary to established constitutional procedures," said Hudson, who added that he was at the apartment Tuesday night.

Officers have the right to seize a home after a crime if they believe a suspect remains inside or there is evidence they must obtain immediately, according to police and legal specialists. Once they have ensured no one is inside the home, they should stand guard outside and prevent anyone from entering until a search warrant is executed.

[ellery]

ping

[driftdiver]

“”The manner in which this search was done was certainly contrary to established constitutional procedures,” “

He means it was illegal.

[Jubal Harshaw]

Wow. Not too often you see a violation of the third amendment, let alone the 5th amendment at the same time.

[org.whodat]

Some one done dirty his drawers. Perp will walk if anything in the house was important to the case.

[ellery]

I was thinking the same thing — ‘til now, the third has been the only one that various levels of government don’t violate regularly.