Vložit
- čas přidán 7. 09. 2024
- Roadside Chat: Knock and talk after being told to leave
If you want to join the next Search & Seizure Show LIVE ON AIR, Check out our calendar to sign up for free. Ask your questions live!
bluetogold.com/calendar
If you like this video, don’t forget to like and subscribe to our channel for more legal updates!
-
🚨 Have a search and seizure question in mind? Send it here and have it answered by Anthony: www.bluetogold...
Blue to Gold Training:
➜ Class Schedules - www.bluetogold...
➜ On-demand Training - university.blu...
➜ Free Legal Training Webinar - www.bluetogold....
➜ Book Store and Training Materials - www.bluetogold...
CONNECT WITH US:
🌍 Facebook - / bluetogold
📸 Instagram - / bluetogold
🐦 Twitter - / bluetogold
🎥 TikTok - www.tiktok.com....
💌 LinkedIn - / blue. .
#LawEnforcementTraining #PoliceTraining #LegalEducation
I make sure to listen to this channel at least 3xs a week.
I love that routine. Thank you!
Yet another excellent video. This is not really a gray area. It is only muddled by the lazy mentality of "well this is the way we do business," or "this is the way we've always done it." The issue could not be better laid out by Tony.
From the multitude of videos I have seen when cops enter a person's property and violate civil rights, my observation is that cops believe the following equation:
A "service call" to 911 = permission to violate a person's civil liberties.
Maybe training issue or maybe cops know that normal people don't have the resources/money to take cops to court for violation of civil liberties. Also, even if cops know the rights, they will still arrest people on their property without a warrant to punish civilians for insolence to cops.
One of the greatest threats to an officer's career is pride. Another is ignorance.
If they have a warrant, no question. If they don't, NO.
This situation should be straight forward enough to get a warrant with a credible witness.
The police never observe your rights.
If PC existed in this situation (which it may have) despite him being on curtilage, he was not inside his physical residence. Wouldn't US V SANTANA and US V WATSON allow for the warrantless arrest if he was obviously more exposed to the public on his porch than a person in the open threshold of their doorway?
There is no "open threshold of doorway" standard, this is some weird idea that some Police have, that somehow they can be on curtilage and pull someone from inside their home.
That is NEVER legally justified.
The curtilage is exactly the same as being in your home. Just because it is physically easier to pull someone off curtilage, does not mean it is legally more justified.
Even a felony murder with probable cause, requires a legal justification to make an arrest in a home or curtilage.
If there is no arrest warrant, and if that is not the domicile of the person with a warrant, a search warrant for that address, what is needed is either.
1. Consent
2. Fleeing felon, where the felony was witnessed by the police, and off the curtilage and the suspect fled inside the curtilage.
3. Exigent circumstances.
A. Danger to others.
B. Destruction of evidence.
Number 3 can only exist when getting a warrant in time would not be possible, such as a person dying on the floor.
In the example here, it is a skateboard, once the police were told to leave, they were criminally trespassing by remaining.
A knock and Talk provides law enforcement no more right to be on property than a Girl Scout selling cookies would enjoy. Police in a knock and talk are EXACTLY like anyone else. No more, and no less, rights to be on that property.
There are videos on CZcams of cops committing the "strongarm robbery" Brizuela was accused of committing, but they don't get charged for it. Nor does anyone go to their home, illegally trespass on their property, and shoot them. They were illegally there. They had enough to get a warrant, but chose not to do so. Brizuela was stupid for pulling a gun, especially if he wasn't going to use it against them, but the fact is they were unlawfully on his property and killed him.
So what you're saying here, BtG is that Brizuela COULD have LAWFULLY killed those cops had he survived the brandishing/exposing of his weapon?
Wow well put
Great channel
I don't always agree with Anthony. But, I have always found his commentaries firmly based on the law. And I have found him, as here, to be consistent in advising LE to pursue its law enforcement mission only in compliance with the statutory and constitutional limits applicable to that mission. So, I can only heartily applaud Anthony and his presentation in this episode for his solid advice to LE to obey the Constitutional limitations on their investigations and attempts to arrest. I might also add that with the Constitutional constraints on their LE activities is not an exception to warrant requirements and other well established limits on LE activities. LE goals
As to First Amendment Auditors, I see little value in their baiting of LE. But Anthony is correct that LE inability to contain themselves is far too prevalent when dealing with such folks. There activity is protected at least when acting in a public area and as officers sworn to uphold the Constitution, officers are morally and legally obligated to constrain their responses to auditors within Constitutional limits and their failure to do so only undermines the respect the public has for them.
As to JustABill02's suggestion that felony murder principals should be applied to these officers. I too note that officers all too frequently are speeding about in cars without lights and sirens as generally required by statute, they all too frequently apply excessive force resulting sometimes in employment penalties, but rarely the criminal penalties that would be applied to civilians had they similarly assaulted others. LE unions seem to support the most egregious LE misconduct leaving civilians to shake their heads. If we want civilian respect for and cooperation with law enforcement, LE has to be held more responsible for their actions than currently seems to occur. I am not well enough informed about the facts of the case underly Anthony's episode, much less the policy considerations applicable to applying the felony murder rule to the officer's continued presence on the property and the eventual shooting of the occupant. I'd be very interested in Anthony's response to the comment that felony murder rule principals should apply to these officers.
A man gets killed by police after telling them to leave his property, and yet HE'S the scumbag.
So what if you just want to detain the person in their driveway (yellow curtilage) to develop probable cause, the suspect never explicitly tells you to leave, and once you have PC, you go to arrest him? (Again on yellow curtilage) also, if he is detained (IE controlling his movements, not allowing him to go into his home, etc), doesn't that diminish his authority to "consent" to you being on his property and so vice versa does his ability to tell you to leave his curtilage, even while detained, diminish your authority to have him detained and do you have to leave?
In this situation it would have to be consensual encounter. Exceptions would be if it was a domestic situation and he needed to be detained.That would be an exigent circumstance where they could be on curtilage if the nature of the call supports it. Like the man was allegedly beating his wife or had beat his wife.
Are cops really this incompetent? If you have PC get a warrant then go to his house. Or set up outside waiting for a warrant to follow him if he leaves. It's almost like the entirety of a cop's legal knowledge came from TV shows. The only reason it's difficult for cops disengage when the law is not on their side is because of egos not bad training. And cops really do love proving they have power even when they don't.
You should try and do the job. LE agencies are hiring everywhere.
Step up or shut up.
@@andrisimusmaximus5803 I have too much integrity and allegiancr to the Constitution and this country to be a cop. They hold only allegiance to each other and falsely make their oath of office. So go back to deep throating that whole boot, bootlicker.
@@andrisimusmaximus5803another piss poor example of a uniformed tyrant incapable of taking justified criticism. GFY.
@@frankbeardsley2941 but where do you work? Burger King? Your pathetic a$$ couldn't hold a candle to the complexities of being a cop.
Great channel but I can imagine cops hate it. Why? Because it teaches them how to stay in the bounds of laws and civil liberties. I have watched many of video of cops going onto private property and nearly in every case they violated everything this channel is teaching about the legality of those interactions. In fact, one of thee most subscribed to channels on cop illegalities was created by a guy (a medic who served multiple times) when a cop threatened to arrest him while he was on his stoop filming some them as they talked to his neighbors.
Anthony shows his true colors on this one...calling a Deadman names and making fun of where he lived with that "estate" comment... Class act
By saying he’s not a nice man. Obviously he wasn’t
Love your channel!
Thank you so much!