April 27, 2009
Eleventh Circuit holds that reasonable suspicion sufficient for search of probationer
Today in US v. Carter, No. 08-14460 (11th Cir. April 27, 2009) (available here), the Eleventh Circuit addresses an interesting intersection of different strands of criminal procedure jurisprudence. Here is how the ruling begins:
We consider in this appeal whether the warrantless search of the home of the Defendant, a probationer, was reasonable under the Fourth Amendment. We apply the balancing test articulated in United States v. Knights, 534 U.S. 112, 122 S. Ct. 587 (2001), and conclude that the search in this case was reasonable if supported by reasonable suspicion. And, because there was reasonable suspicion that the Defendant was engaged in criminal conduct, we conclude that the search was reasonable and affirm the district court’s denial of the Defendant’s motion to suppress.
April 27, 2009 at 02:51 PM | Permalink
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Eleventh Circuit holds that reasonable suspicion sufficient for search of probationer:
wrong based on knights, samson, but not certworthy.
Posted by: pubdefender | Apr 27, 2009 6:38:12 PM
Looks like more of the sort of legal tea-leaf reading that continues to hallow out the Fourth Amendment.
Decisions like this continue to teach law enforcement agencies they can do whatever they want to whomever they want with the courts’ blessings.
The "balancing test" appears to further empower authorities to search at will the homes of any of the millions of Americans living under government “supervision”…with or without warrantless search provisions in their probation orders.
So I can’t help but wonder what will protect any of those Americans from retribution-inspired raids and the possibility of planted evidence.
I searched without luck for details of Carter's allegedly violent criminal history. I'm skeptical, though, because some prosecutors load charging documents with inflammatory language capable of distorting and exaggerating even somewhat banal conduct into grave, imminent threats to society .
If any of this sounds a little too anti-authoritarian, please consider that the posting on Carter’s lost appeal shares space today with one noting a sheriff is on his way to prison for trying to rig a grand jury hearing.
Posted by: John K | Apr 28, 2009 12:58:28 PM
Mother in distress : Please read a the case of Hector United States v.Hernandez,NO.89-CR-229(TCP)(E.D.N.Y.March27,2009)Just to let you Know about the Extraordinary Circumstance about his case. The Judge is Thomas C. Platt, Eastern Distric Court of New york. Hernandez appeal his case in 1993 and remanded for resentencing. The judge did not call the case back for almost 170 months ago which I belive raises costitutional concerns.I had to write a letter to his chief Judge Dearie, who responden very soon to call the case for a decision.Judge Thomas C. Platt resentenced Hernandez to the same amount of time.Now my question is how a judge can have so much power? Read the inernet about this judge. Thanks Celia Arnaldi
Posted by: Celia arnaldi | May 14, 2009 6:29:47 PM