Post by Origanalist on Dec 16, 2014 3:51:10 GMT -8
Supreme Court Sides With Police In 4th Amendment Case Arising from Officer’s ‘Mistake of Law’
In a decision issued this morning, the U.S. Supreme Court sided with the police in a case arising from an officer’s “mistake of law.” At issue in Heien v. North Carolina was a 2009 traffic stop for a single busted brake light that led to the discovery of illegal drugs inside the vehicle.
According to state law at the time, however, motor vehicles were required only to have “a stop lamp,” meaning that the officer did not have a lawful reason for the initial traffic stop because it was not a crime to drive around with a single busted brake light.
Did that stop therefore violate the 4th Amendment’s guarantee against unreasonable search and seizure? Writing today for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts held that it did not. “Because the officer’s mistake about the brake-light law was reasonable,” Roberts declared, “the stop in this case was lawful under the Fourth Amendment.”
continued at....reason.com/blog/2014/12/15/supreme-court-sides-with-police-in-4th-a
Comment from another site..."The obvious problem is that now a cop can illegally search anyone for any bizarre reason and simply claim it was a "mistake." "
Apparently not obvious to the "supreme" court. Or is it?
In a decision issued this morning, the U.S. Supreme Court sided with the police in a case arising from an officer’s “mistake of law.” At issue in Heien v. North Carolina was a 2009 traffic stop for a single busted brake light that led to the discovery of illegal drugs inside the vehicle.
According to state law at the time, however, motor vehicles were required only to have “a stop lamp,” meaning that the officer did not have a lawful reason for the initial traffic stop because it was not a crime to drive around with a single busted brake light.
Did that stop therefore violate the 4th Amendment’s guarantee against unreasonable search and seizure? Writing today for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts held that it did not. “Because the officer’s mistake about the brake-light law was reasonable,” Roberts declared, “the stop in this case was lawful under the Fourth Amendment.”
continued at....reason.com/blog/2014/12/15/supreme-court-sides-with-police-in-4th-a
Comment from another site..."The obvious problem is that now a cop can illegally search anyone for any bizarre reason and simply claim it was a "mistake." "
Apparently not obvious to the "supreme" court. Or is it?