Posted on 06/17/2005 8:47:31 AM PDT by Millee
A routine call to check a loud party complaint at a home in one of this Fort Bend County city's swankiest neighborhoods has mushroomed into a full-fledged legal battle, with a squad of seasoned criminal defense attorneys lined up one side and the city on the other.
The dispute centers on citations police issued to 37 teenagers for possessing alcohol. Many of the teens say they were not drinking at the April 14 party. The parents were not home.
Some of the teens have pleaded guilty, but others and their parents are fighting the charges. They say police walked in without a warrant and simply issued citations to everyone in attendance, paying no mind to who was drinking and who was not.
On the other side of the dispute are city leaders and police who say officers had a duty to curtail underage drinking.
The attorneys, many of whom work felony cases in district court, met with the prosecutor and judge in municipal court Thursday to hash out details about an upcoming hearing on the case.
A parent, Rene Woodring, said she is fighting the charges because her daughter was not drinking.
"The police came in. They didn't check to see which kids were drinking. They just said everybody is getting a minor in possession" citation, she said.
Woodring went to the house in the 800 block of Sugar Creek shortly after the 10:47 p.m. raid and asked police to give sobriety tests to determine who had been drinking.
"They said, 'No, everybody is getting a ticket and you just have to go to court and we will sort it out there,' " Woodring said Thursday.
Woodring and other parents are also angry because those who received citations were not allowed to take part in extracurricular activities at school.
Sugar Land Mayor David Wallace said despite the view of defense attorneys and some parents, city officials think the officers had legal cause to enter the house and issue citations.
"We take a very strong stance on minors in possession and we take a strong stance on illegal and underage drinking," he said.
Wallace said some of the teens and their parents have filed complaints against police for what they call unprofessional or abusive behavior.
"We are working those and continuing to investigate those" complaints, he said.
While many are fighting the charges, Sugar Land prosecutor Jan Baker said 14 of the teenagers have pleaded guilty.
At the pre-trial conference Thursday, defense lawyers filed motions saying officers entered the house illegally because they did not have a warrant or probable cause.
The attorneys want the search and all evidence seized to be suppressed.
Municipal Court Judge D. Craig Landin said the legal issues regarding the entry and search of the home will be argued during a June 30 hearing.
Attorney Keith Hampton, who is representing one of the teens, said circumstances did not give police cause to enter the house.
Police can enter a house without a warrant or consent from the owner under certain conditions, such as a life being in danger or evidence being destroyed.
Although there were no indications of serious felonies being committed in the home, prosecutor Baker thinks there is sufficient case law to permit the actions the officers took.
The episode began when police were sent to the Sugar Creek house to investigate complaints about a party, said Sugar Land police spokeswoman Pat Whitty.
As officers pulled up to the two-story home, several partygoers ran away.
Officers went inside where they corralled 37 people younger than 21. They also found dozens of beers and other alcoholic beverages. Whitty said police issued citations for minor in possession of alcohol and arrested two people.
You're right...you just keep posting the same thing. Your basic point is that if the cops can't easily decided who is actually in possession of a controlled substance then everyone in the general area should be charged. We all got that point the first time you posted it.
The point still stands however that not every person in a grouping of people is responsible for what others do. Sure, sometimes people can get railroaded when the cops are lazy and the judge just rubber stamps it, but that doesn't make it right.
In many situations, especially with teen parties at a private residence, many people at the party may be totally unaware of what another is drinking. If you've ever been to a college football game as a student this should be crystal clear. I saw many students sitting near me drinking alcohol that they snuck in...that doesn't make everyone in the student section guilty of possession.
The same thing happens at teen parties...a few people bring in their alcohol and others are unaware or or uninvolved with what they are drinking.
In regards to your alcohol in the car scenario, if one beer was in the car and one person was drinking it, it is truly doubtful that others would be charged.
Sometimes, the Bill of Rights trumps the cops' convenience. If a cop can't ascertain who truly committed a crime, then no one should be charged. Why should people that have committed no crime be punished just so the cops can take short cuts?
what rights were these kids deprived of? all I see is that they were cited with 'possession' of a substance that by law is illegal for them to possess by virtue of their age(s)?
The same thing happens at teen parties...a few people bring in their alcohol and others are unaware or or uninvolved with what they are drinking.
I agree, if the cops hadn't already stated the alcohol was sitting in plain view. After that you cannot say the other teens were unaware. If by chance there are teens there that are blind then I would give them a pass. All of the rest of them get a ticket. If it is sitting around in plain site they cannot say they had no idea and were unaware there was alcohol, and therefore, are in possession.
Unless of course one of them or some of them step forward and take resposibility for the contraband. Which, by the way, is the ethical thing to do. Don't know if it happened in this case, but by the way the parents are reacting, I doubt it.
I realize you are trying to give them the benefit of the doubt, but I raised two teenagers and for me to think they were all not in on the conspiracy is ludicrous. It just don't work that way with teens and their peers. I have two really great kids but like every one of their freinds they tried to get away with as much as possible. They are just now admitting to antics we did not know about. It is a good thing too, cause they'd still be grounded 10 years later.....LOL
Did they wreck the place?
I think we agree on a lot. What I am pointing on in this situation is that it is not the party goer's responsibility to police the party for alcohol. It is very true that sometimes the cops just charge everyone in the general area and the judge just rubberstamps the charges. This doesn't make it right, however, and really shouldn't be applauded. It's lazy police work and reckless behavior judges.
Police do this all the time and its reprehensible. It occurs with motorcycles where one group might be driving recklessly, and the cops ticket every rider they see - even if it is the completely wrong group. It basically reverses the system and presumes the charged to be guilty and must prove their innocence.
Going back to the case in the article, depending on the laws in the state, if the police can't pinpoint the possession then no one should be charged.
You must be bigoted against those that are bigoted... Makes you a bigot in my opinion... /sarcasm
Good grief... lets just have a discussion here without resorting to name calling... We all are bigoted in some manner or another.. it is human nature... get over it.
If you don't see probable cause from this senerio, then you are just making a mockery of God's eye He gave us. Lets just blindfold police officers and be done with it /sarcasm
You know that if this were a story about black kids carrying on in Gary or Indianapolis, these same swanky parents would be supporting the cops 110%.
52
Really? I don't care whether the kids are black, white, green, yellow,checkerboard, or pokadot. I have a big problem with cops busting into a house without a warrant and indiscriminately arresting adults for something that should not even be a crime in the first place.
YOU DON’T NEED A SEARCH WARRANT FOR DISTURBING THE PEACE CITATIONS. WHAT, THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO “HOLD OFF” AND GET THE WARRANT WHILE THE NEIGHBORS HAVE TO PUT UP WITH THIS S**T FOR ANOTHER TWO HOURS?
AND, THEY WEREN’T ADULTS. AND IT IS “POLKADOT”.
43
It amazes me to hear people on Free Republic cheering the death of liberty and the rise of the police state. The police ADMIT they don't know which kids actually violated the law so they simply charged everybody like all good police states do - guilty until proved innocent.
I bet you won't cheer the loss of liberty and the rise of the police state when the police come for you - but by then it may be too late.
LOSS OF LIBERTY? OH, PUHLEAZE. WHAT I AM TALKING ABOUT IS HOW FOLKS ARE SO WORRIED ABOUT THEIR RIGHTS AND SO LITTLE CONCERNED WITH THEIR RESPONSIBILITIES. THIS IS A UNIVERSAL PROBLEM IN THIS COUNTRY THAT SPANS AGES, DEMOGRAPHICS, RACE AND, JUDGING BY THE RESPONSES HERE, POLITICAL AFFILIATIONS.
41
Oh so you have conclusive proof everyone of these kids were drinking do you? Well I suggest you give it to the police because they sure as hell don't have. But never mind, convict them all, we don't want a little thing like evidence, proof, or due process to get in the way of your pre-concieved bias.
YEAH, I MUST BE WRONG. I AM SURE THESE ARE ALL CARD-CARRYING EVANGELICALS WHO WERE ERRONEOUSLY SWEPT UP IN A DRAGNET. WE WONDER WHY SOME KIDS WILL OBSERVE A GANG RAPE AND NEVER DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT (A SUBJECT ON SOME PAST POSTS I BELIEVE). OH, THEY WERE JUST THERE (SO THEY SAY), BUT “THEY DIDN’T PARTICIPATE.” IT STARTS HERE – MAKING CHOICES, MAKING THE RIGHT CHOICES, STARTS HERE.
16
You are painting with an overly-broad brush. In the same breath you are calling the parents racists (without any evidence whatsoever) and stereotyping the behaviors of "evil rich people". NO, I AM CALLING THEM HYPOCRITES, FAILING TO BE INVOLVED IN THEIR CHILDREN’S UPBRINGING, AND FORCING THE NANNY STATE TO DESCEND UPON THEIR KIDS AND DO IT FOR THEM, AND THEN WHINING ABOUT IT.
Are you a Democrat? I HAVE BEEN A CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN PROBABLY LONGER THAN YOU AND I DESPISE “PRIVILEGE” OF ANY KIND, INCLUDING THAT AFFORDED BY WEALTH. GIVEN THE WAY YOU ARE CHARACTERIZING THE POLICE, SOUND LIKE YOU BELONG TO ACORN OR ACT OR THE SDS OR SOME OTHER ANARCHIST GROUP.
12
All these little rich brats think they have a God-given right to screw off just because Daddy has money.
My guess is they've been paying attention to how the system works.
YEP.
7
"You know that if this were a story about black kids carrying on in Gary or Indianapolis, these same swanky parents would be supporting the cops 110%."
Bingo. Same applies to certain FReepers.
I LOVE HOW EVERYONE IS JUMPING TO THE DEFENSE OF THESE KIDS AND AUTOMATICALLY ASSUMING THE COPS HAVE RUN AMOK. I DIDN’T SUPPORT THE RAISING OF THE DRINKING AGE TO 21 (I REMEMBER WHEN IT WAS 17), BUT MY KIDS SURE AS HELL BETTER ABIDE BY IT SO LONG AS THEY’RE UNDER MY ROOF (EVEN I’M NOT NAÏVE ENOUGH TO PREDICT HOW THEY’LL BEHAVE IN COLLEGE-ALTHOUGH I CAN HOPE).
FRANKLY, I AGREE WITH A POSTER WHO SAID THE COPS WILL HAVE TO DROP AT LEAST SOME OF THE CHARGES; PART OF THE GIVE AND TAKE OF LAW ENFORCEMENT. I ALSO AGREE WITH ANOTHER POSTER WHO SAID WE COULD HAVE A BETTER PROCEDURE THAT PUTS THE FIRST OFFENDERS ON A DIFFERENT TRACK, MAYBE EXTRAJUDICIAL.
BUT IT IS BOTH AMUSING AND SAD TO SEE HOW SOME HAVE ASSUMED THAT THE COPS ARE ON SOME CRAZED POWER-HUNGRY CRUSADE AND THESE KIDS ARE JUST A BUNCH OF INNOCENTS. WE DON’T KNOW IF THIS WAS THE FIRST TIME THE COPS HAD COME TO THIS HOUSE. WE DON’T KNOW IF THIS WAS THE FIRST TIME THE COPS DISCOVERED ALCOHOL. NO, WE ONLY KNOW WHAT THE “NOT MY LITTLE MUFFY” PARENTS ARE TELLING THE PRESS.
I AM AN EQUAL-OPPORTUNITY ENFORCER. NO PLEA BARGAINS UNLESS YOU CAN GIVE UP SOMEBODY HIGHER UP THAN YOU. IS THERE AN RACIAL IMBALANCE IN DEATH SENTENCES? MY ANSWER: EXECUTE MORE WHITE MURDERERS. I AM FOR THE UNIVERSAL DRAFT AND A FLAT TAX. I BELIEVE THAT YOU HAVE TO GIVE BACK TO THIS COUNTRY AT LEAST AS MUCH AS YOU GET. AND NO, I HAVE NO SYMPATHY FOR COUNTRY-CLUB REPUBLICANS (AND THERE IS NO GUARANTEE THAT THESE KIDS AND THEIR PARENTS AREN’T SOME NO MORALITY, PRO—ABORTION, I-LOVE-THE-STATUS-QUO-SO-LONG-AS-IT-BENEFITS-ME ELITISTS). IF YOU DON’T WANT THE GOVERNMENT (OR HILLARY’S “VILLAGE”) RAISING YOUR KIDS, THEN GET INVOLVED AND RAISE THEM YOURSELF, AND RAISE THEM EFFING RIGHT.
"IF YOU DON’T WANT THE GOVERNMENT (OR HILLARY’S “VILLAGE”) RAISING YOUR KIDS, THEN GET INVOLVED AND RAISE THEM YOURSELF, AND RAISE THEM EFFING RIGHT."
Once again, Bingo.
As is usually the case in an incident like this, there are many conflicting accounts and the full facts and circumstances are hazy at best. Nevertheless, I think there is one point on which there can be very little doubt and upon which I think we can probably all agree and that is that none of the cops's kids were invited to this party...;-)
Police have screening breath testers (The Alert Device is one) and if there is a no alcohol policy, the test would have been able to sort the crowd out pretty quickly.
"Punishing the group for the actions of a few stinks, always has. Forcing everyone to 'prove their innocence' doesn't cut it either, but the ones who would volunteer to be tested probably are not the ones who should be cited, either.
Then there are age and other issues involved.
Without proof that they were consuming alcohol, however, they have no case. O'Doul's smells like beer, but it ain't.
Probable cause to get a warrant--yes.
Probable cause to enter the home--no.
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.