Violation of 4th amendment right? - Page 2

Punisher_1 · July 2, 2013, 10:24 AM

So if we are to be searched for this event what about the next parade or carnival? Is there a number of people present rule for searching people in a public place. It used to be you had to have something that brought suspicion like time of day or an activity the person was engaged in not just being there.

**Frank Ettin** · July 2, 2013, 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Punisher_1

So if we are to be searched for this event what about the next parade or carnival? Is there a number of people present rule for searching people in a public place. It used to be you had to have something that brought suspicion like time of day or an activity the person was engaged in not just being there.

Well, as has been mentioned, the right protected by the Fourth Amendment is to be secure from unreasonable search. So if some governmental authority wants to routinely search the bags, coolers or persons of people attending some public event, if the searches are challenged the governmental authority will have the burden of convincing a judge that the searches are reasonable.

There has been a pretty fair amount of litigation of the question of the reasonableness of searches under various circumstances. So there's a good deal of decisional law about when a search is, or is not, reasonable. And judges will look to that body of decisional law when trying to decide if a particular search requirement is, or is not, reasonable.

I'm not, however, going to do many hours of research and then write what would amount to a law review article discussing in detail the existing legal standards for determining the reasonableness of a search at a public event.

Punisher_1 · July 2, 2013, 04:02 PM

With the ever changing circumstances that occur I have no doubt that there will be further case law decisions about a reasonable search. I just wonder how it became so difficult to know your rights since they were written. As you said it could take hours of research to come up with an opinion that could still be argued. It seems it should just be simpler for both the citizen and the LEOs.

**Spats McGee** · July 2, 2013, 05:04 PM

Fourth Amendment law is fertile ground for litigation. It's a very fact intensive area, and the rewards for litigants (who are often inmates) can be tremendous (like freedom instead of incarceration + the inevitable 1983 suit if the inmate prevails).

iraiam · July 5, 2013, 10:51 AM

It's becoming increasingly obvious to me that the terrorists have won, when we can't go to a public park without having our personal affects searched, they have won.

PawPaw · July 5, 2013, 05:13 PM

Well, first, we have to define "public". Are you sure that the property in question is owned by the city, parish, county, or state?

I'm not familiar with the vagaries of Florida law, but I work within Louisiana Law. I work in a school, which some might consider to be a "public" building, but if a key-holder asks you to leave and you fail to do so, you can be cited for trespassing, or arrested for a variety of charges if you make a scene.

The best place to deal with this is not in the Courts but in the City Council offices. Make it a political issue. Solve it at the administrative level before it becomes an issue in the courts.

hermannr · July 7, 2013, 02:21 PM

Not knowing FL law: here in WA this would be a reason to sue the entity that owns the park, and the LE jurisdiction for a violation Of Article 1 section 7 of the WA State Constitution, as well as the 4A. WA does not allow for any random stops, or road block DUI (etc) checks.

US Supreme Court ruled in Delaware V Prouse that a license check, for no other reason than to check for a license was not legal and a 4A infringement, but (don't have a cite) the US Supreme court also ruled that DUI road block checks were legal because of the overwhelming public safety interest.

My conclusion, whether #4 is legal, or not, would depend on FL state law, and/or whether the defense can convince the judge/jury that there was not an "overwhelming" public safety interest.

July 2, 2013, 05:04 PM	#29
Spats McGee Staff Join Date: July 28, 2010 Location: Arkansas Posts: 8,840	Fourth Amendment law is fertile ground for litigation. It's a very fact intensive area, and the rewards for litigants (who are often inmates) can be tremendous (like freedom instead of incarceration + the inevitable 1983 suit if the inmate prevails). __________________ I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some.

July 5, 2013, 10:51 AM	#30
iraiam Senior Member Join Date: September 6, 2012 Location: Lakewood, CO Posts: 1,058	It's becoming increasingly obvious to me that the terrorists have won, when we can't go to a public park without having our personal affects searched, they have won. __________________ NRA Lifetime Member Since 1999 "I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people except for a few public officials." George Mason

July 2, 2013, 10:24 AM	#26
Punisher_1 Senior Member Join Date: December 16, 2012 Location: Florida Posts: 136	So if we are to be searched for this event what about the next parade or carnival? Is there a number of people present rule for searching people in a public place. It used to be you had to have something that brought suspicion like time of day or an activity the person was engaged in not just being there.

July 2, 2013, 04:02 PM	#28
Punisher_1 Senior Member Join Date: December 16, 2012 Location: Florida Posts: 136	With the ever changing circumstances that occur I have no doubt that there will be further case law decisions about a reasonable search. I just wonder how it became so difficult to know your rights since they were written. As you said it could take hours of research to come up with an opinion that could still be argued. It seems it should just be simpler for both the citizen and the LEOs.

July 5, 2013, 05:13 PM	#31
PawPaw Senior Member Join Date: December 24, 2010 Location: Central Louisiana Posts: 3,137	Well, first, we have to define "public". Are you sure that the property in question is owned by the city, parish, county, or state? I'm not familiar with the vagaries of Florida law, but I work within Louisiana Law. I work in a school, which some might consider to be a "public" building, but if a key-holder asks you to leave and you fail to do so, you can be cited for trespassing, or arrested for a variety of charges if you make a scene. The best place to deal with this is not in the Courts but in the City Council offices. Make it a political issue. Solve it at the administrative level before it becomes an issue in the courts.

July 7, 2013, 02:21 PM	#32
hermannr Senior Member Join Date: March 24, 2011 Posts: 730	Not knowing FL law: here in WA this would be a reason to sue the entity that owns the park, and the LE jurisdiction for a violation Of Article 1 section 7 of the WA State Constitution, as well as the 4A. WA does not allow for any random stops, or road block DUI (etc) checks. US Supreme Court ruled in Delaware V Prouse that a license check, for no other reason than to check for a license was not legal and a 4A infringement, but (don't have a cite) the US Supreme court also ruled that DUI road block checks were legal because of the overwhelming public safety interest. My conclusion, whether #4 is legal, or not, would depend on FL state law, and/or whether the defense can convince the judge/jury that there was not an "overwhelming" public safety interest.