Although he is not technically a part of the family, especially if Charles has anything to say about it, the first issue is the boyfriend’s arrest on drug charges. James seems like a good guy caught up in a bad situation. Of course he was nervous when the police showed up, but should he have given them permission to search his car? Was the search legal? What will happen to him now?
Legally, the U.S. Constitution’s Fourth Amendment prohibits “unreasonable” searches and seizures. This provision is based on the common law castle doctrine, as in “a man’s home is his castle.” However, while people have a right to be secure from arbitrary searches, police officers also have a right duty to enforce the law and seize contraband. The Fourth Amendment was the way the founding father’s sought to curtail the absolute power of government and protect the rights of the people.
Search Warrant Exceptions
Even if officers do not have a search warrant, the evidence they obtain may still be admissible at trial. If one of the warrant exceptions applies, courts will deem the search and seizure to be reasonable and therefore allowable under the Fourth Amendment.
Consent is by far the most frequently-used exception. When an officer asks for permission to search a house, car, or whatever, the target of that search has a near-absolute right to refuse consent. At that point, officers may either drop the matter or detain the defendant for a reasonable time while they obtain a warrant. James, however, did not refuse his consent to have the police search his car. As a result, he was taken into custody on drug charges.
Officers cannot use coercion to obtain consent. Moreover, they must obtain effective consent, so in the above example, if the James had been merely a passenger in the car, he probably would have lacked the authority to consent to its search.
Before 2009, a search incident to arrest was a commonly-cited exception, as well. Back then, officers could “arrest” defendants for something like running a stop sign and use this exception to search their cars. But in Arizona v. Gant, the Supreme Court limited a search incident to an arrest to a weapons pat-down, so this exception is not used much anymore.
The other five recognized search warrant exceptions are:
- Plain view,
- Stop and frisk,
- Automobile exception,
- Hot pursuit, and
- Exigent circumstances.
For each of these exceptions, the prosecutor has the burden of proof to establish every element therein.
What will Happen to James?
James will face a trial for his criminal drug charges, and he will face a jury of his peers who will determine whether he is guilty or not. The mere fact that James was arrested may push many jurors towards a guilty verdict. After all, some jurors often reason, the police would not have arrested James unless he was a bad person who did something wrong.
Therefore, to preserve the presumption of innocence, the judge will instruct the jury not to consider the fact that the defendant was arrested or placed on trial as evidence of his or her guilt. Typically, that instruction resonates with the jurors and they do not determine credibility based on an arrest. But people are people. Sometimes they are prejudiced, and they do not abandon their biases just because the judge instructs them to do so. This concern is even more acute if the defendant is in jail at the time of trial.
A good criminal defense attorney will take steps to deal with this prejudice. During jury questioning, any jurors with a nagging prejudice can usually be identified and removed from the panel. If the defendant is in jail, he or she should be allowed to wear street clothes, not be visibly restrained (except in extreme circumstances), and the judge should grant a motion in limine to prevent the state’s attorney or anyone else from bringing up the fact of his or her current incarceration. James can hope for a fair and unbiased jury, and meanwhile, he can hire the best criminal defense attorney he can find to help him beat the charges.
Will he be convicted? Tune in to find out…
Rely on Experienced Attorneys
A warrantless seizure can result in a criminal prosecution. For a confidential consultation with an experienced criminal law attorney in Schaumburg, contact Glasgow & Olsson.
(image courtesy of Nicole Barbier Garreau)