Court: No right to resist illegal cop entry into home (Indiana)

[Eupher]

Wow. This is stunning.

Good job finding this one, thundley.

I suppose SCOTUS has thought of all the parameters. Instead of hearing a toilet flush and thinking it's the sound of somebody getting rid of drugs, how about somebody actually using the thing for more normal purposes? And sounds of people "moving around" indicating illegal activity? AYFKM? If somebody pounded on MY door yelling police, you damned right I'd be "moving around." I'd be getting my gun and into position.

This is idiotic on so many levels it defies description.

[NHSparky]

Oh, it keeps getting better and better:

http://www.mikechurch.com/Today-s-Lead-Story/in-sheriff-if-we-need-to-conduct-random-house-to-house-searches-we-will.html

CROWN POINT, Ind. – According to Newton County Sheriff, Don Hartman Sr., random house to house searches are now possible and could be helpful following the Barnes v. STATE of INDIANA Supreme Court ruling issued on May 12th, 2011. When asked three separate times due to the astounding callousness as it relates to trampling the inherent natural rights of Americans, he emphatically indicated that he would use random house to house checks, adding he felt people will welcome random searches if it means capturing a criminal.

Speaking under the condition of anonymity, a local city Police Chief with 30 years experience in law enforcement directly contradicted the Newton County Sheriff’s blatant disregard for privacy & liberty, stating that as an American first, such an action is unconscionable and that his allegiance is to the Indiana and federal Constitutions respectively. However, he also concurred that the ruling does now allow for police to randomly search homes should a department be under order by state or federal officials or under a department’s own accord.

==================================

And in other weekend news, 2 home invasion robberies conducted in the last 3 days by people impersonating cops.

http://www.southbendtribune.com/news/sbt-2nd-home-invasion-in-three-days-20110514,0,2665087.story

[DumbAss Tanker]

After reading this apart again it makes me think differently.

It seems to me that he is saying that even though the police may enter without "cause", anything they may find as evidence of any crime not pertaining to their entry would still be excluded from evidence.  In this case if they entered as a response to the domestic violence call and found drugs or weapons, those would be excluded under the unreasonable search and seizure defense.

Yes, that's troubling.  The Court could have gone with the reasoning Thor laid out and been on very solid, established ground as an 'Exigent circumstances' exception to the warrant requirement and nobody would have fluttered an eyelash.  Clearly once the police are called on 911, they need to ensure the safety of the caller and they have good cause to believe someone is in imminent danger until they do.  Instead the Court goes on a totally unnecessary excursion into bootstrapping a limitless right to unwarranted entry, which can only muddy the waters of 4th Amendment law, and honestly appears to be totally without any Constitutional basis...the Constitution says a lot about the right of individuals to be secure in their home and possessions, but it doesn't say a single word about the powers of police agencies.     

[Attero Dominatus]

I have to agree with the dissenters. It sets the precedent that a a government agent can enter anyone's property, for any reason, without a warrant. The kind of thing seen in authoritarian countries.

[rich_t]

Oh, it keeps getting better and better:

http://www.mikechurch.com/Today-s-Lead-Story/in-sheriff-if-we-need-to-conduct-random-house-to-house-searches-we-will.html

CROWN POINT, Ind. – According to Newton County Sheriff, Don Hartman Sr., random house to house searches are now possible and could be helpful following the Barnes v. STATE of INDIANA Supreme Court ruling issued on May 12th, 2011. When asked three separate times due to the astounding callousness as it relates to trampling the inherent natural rights of Americans, he emphatically indicated that he would use random house to house checks, adding he felt people will welcome random searches if it means capturing a criminal.

Speaking under the condition of anonymity, a local city Police Chief with 30 years experience in law enforcement directly contradicted the Newton County Sheriff’s blatant disregard for privacy & liberty, stating that as an American first, such an action is unconscionable and that his allegiance is to the Indiana and federal Constitutions respectively. However, he also concurred that the ruling does now allow for police to randomly search homes should a department be under order by state or federal officials or under a department’s own accord.

==================================

And in other weekend news, 2 home invasion robberies conducted in the last 3 days by people impersonating cops.

http://www.southbendtribune.com/news/sbt-2nd-home-invasion-in-three-days-20110514,0,2665087.story

Link

It doesn't look like the USSC would overturn that Indiana ruling.

The justices in an 8-1 decision said officers who loudly knock on a door and then hear sounds suggesting evidence is being destroyed may break down the door and enter without a search warrant.

Just what do such sounds actually sound like?  Moving around?  Calling out "just a moment, let me put some clothes on"?  Flushing the toilet after taking a dump?

As I said: People have been, and are continuing to be "conditioned" to not resist regardless of how egregious the actions of a representative of the government might be.

People are going to start shooting more cops if this trend continues.

[Janice]

Indiana's attorney general Zoeller calls for police entry hearing

Indiana's attorney general says he supports asking the state Supreme Court to revisit its recent ruling that found people don't have the right to resist police officers who enter their homes illegally.

Attorney General Greg Zoeller said Friday that a rehearing in the case would "allow for a more narrow ruling that would continue to recognize the individual right of reasonable resistance to unlawful entry." >>>

Although his office represents the prosecution in criminal appeals, Zoeller says he'll support a rehearing in this "unusual case" if the Evansville man asks for one. The defendant has until June 13 to seek a rehearing.

--------------------------------

This AG is doing the right thing, though you have to wonder if it would have happened without this case getting so much public attention. Oh, and while you're at it Mr. Zoeller, how about checking out the other case from the same week, where this statist, activist court ruled the police get to decide whether to knock or not knock when they have a warrant.

[Chris_]

Justices asked to review ruling
<sup>Attorney general opposes decision on police searches

Niki Kelly | The Journal Gazette</sup>
INDIANAPOLIS – Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller on Friday joined the chorus of Hoosiers protesting a controversial Fourth Amendment ruling recently decided by the Indiana Supreme Court.

Zoeller released a statement saying he will support a rehearing of the case due to concerns that the court ruled too broadly when it found citizens have no right under common law to reasonably resist police who unlawfully enter their homes.

The Barnes v. State ruling came last week and was the first major opinion penned by Justice Steven David – Gov. Mitch Daniels’ appointment.

Journal Gazette