Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Unlawful Police Entry Ruling Could Be Reconsidered (Indiana)
theindychannel.com ^ | 06/10/2011 | uncredited

Posted on 06/10/2011 8:01:14 AM PDT by Abathar

INDIANAPOLIS -- The Indiana Supreme Court may reconsider its ruling that eliminates the right of homeowners to resist unlawful police entry into their homes.

The attorney for Richard Barnes, whose criminal case in Vanderburgh County led to the court ruling last month, filed a formal petition for a rehearing Thursday.

Barnes' attorney argues the ruling violates the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

"We believe however that a right to resist an unlawful police entry into a home is against public policy and is incompatible with modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence," part of the petition read.

The court issued its controversial 3-2 ruling May 12, declaring that Hoosiers no longer had a legal right to resist police officers who are entering their home without a legal basis to do so.

The ruling said homeowners could instead seek legal remedies through court proceedings after the fact.

The decision sparked large public outcry, including from state officials. Seventy-one Indiana lawmakers filed a joint brief with the Supreme Court on Wednesday, asking the court to reconsider its opinion.

Gov. Mitch Daniels and Attorney General Greg Zoeller have publicly questioned the decision.

(Excerpt) Read more at theindychannel.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; US: Indiana
KEYWORDS: 4th; 4thamendment; donutwatch; indiana; police; raid; warrant
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-43 last
To: Abathar

Any Indiana freepers know what became of this case? Has it been brushed under the rug?


41 posted on 08/18/2011 9:53:21 PM PDT by Immerito (Reading Through the Bible in 90 Days)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MeganC; Las Vegas Ron
Also from the article you refer to:

"But, again, the piece went by fairly quickly and it’s possible that he simply misfired in response to Blitzer’s flurry of questions on a wide variety of issues. It would be worthwhile for someone to ask Mr. Cain to clarify these remarks in the near future."

He was emphatic about supporting the 2nd Amendment, but also same regarding State's rights. Perhaps someone should ask him to clarify his statements, which as the writer observes "went by fairly quickly and it's possible thae he simply misfired in response...".

I think he is a good man and deserves the opportunity to explain his stance.

42 posted on 08/18/2011 10:39:31 PM PDT by antceecee (Bless us Father.. have mercy on us and protect us from evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Immerito

Good question, I’ve lost track of what has been happening to this case. Time for some research...


43 posted on 08/19/2011 4:25:43 AM PDT by Abathar (Proudly posting without reading the article carefully since 2004)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-43 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson