U.S. Supreme Court
9-0 Court Allows Search & Seizure in Va. Case
Posted Apr 23, 2008 9:44 AM CST
By Molly McDonough
The U.S. Supreme Court held Wednesday that police have the power to search and seize evidence, even when the arrest turns out to have violated state law.
The high court's decision stems from the Virginia case of David Lee Moore. City police seized crack cocaine from Moore's vehicle after he was arrested for driving on a suspended license, the Associated Press reports.
Driving on a suspended license isn't a crime that calls for arrest in Virginia, so Moore challenged the subsequent search and seizure.
The court unanimously (PDF) rejected Moore's challenge, with Justice Antonin Scalia writing, "We reaffirm against a novel challenge what we have signaled for half a century."
- How B of A’s GC Got Fired: Leave Now, and Leave Your BlackBerry Behind
- Schools Ranked by 'Super Lawyers' Produced
- Law Firm Price Wars Break Out as Some Try ‘Loss Leader’ Bids for Work
- Five Questions for Law Firms Abandoning Lockstep Compensation
- Judge Jails 2 Attorneys for Contempt in 4 Days
- Reed Smith Will Ask Nonequity Partners to Pony Up Possibly 15% of Pay
- Court Deputy Ordered to Apologize or Face Jail After Taking Lawyer's Paperwork
- Skadden Jumps on the Bonus Bandwagon
- ABA Executive Director Resigns
- Nasty Attitude to Co-Worker, Naughty Word in E-Mail Cost 2 Their Jobs
Should Supreme Court Justices Be Able to Review News Accounts Before Publication?
Comments
alex
Apr 23, 2008 2:53 PM CST
Why is no one outraged at this ruling, as we proceed deeper into a total police state? Now the cops can illegally arrest you, and THEN search for something to charge you with. I guarantee, the cops could find reason for charges on the pope himself.
Flag this comment
Legal Eagle
Apr 24, 2008 10:00 AM CST
We live in a police state and things are only going to get worse. Deal with it.
Flag this comment
Robert
Apr 24, 2008 10:48 AM CST
It was the right decision, the arrest & search does not violate the 4th Amendment. The Attorney shouldve challenged the search under state law but that would be fruitless because Virginia state law does not exclude evidence of an illegal search. Although, the only argument is that exclusion would be the only remedy for this situation. My humble opinion.
Flag this comment
John
Apr 24, 2008 5:58 PM CST
More than outraged at this ruling, I am sickened by it. To think I wore the uniforms of a law enforcement officer and a soldier for over 20 year to protect the right of the people; to see it errased in one day sickens and saddens me. I am ashamed of our Supreme Nazi Court!! Sieg Heil!
Flag this comment
Add a Comment
We welcome your comments, but please adhere to our comment policy.
Commenting has expired on this post.