Warning: mysql_fetch_assoc() expects parameter 1 to be resource, boolean given in D:\Websites\rave.ca\website\include\functions\visitors.php on line 5

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at D:\Websites\rave.ca\website\include\functions\visitors.php:5) in D:\Websites\rave.ca\website\index.php on line 546

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at D:\Websites\rave.ca\website\include\functions\visitors.php:5) in D:\Websites\rave.ca\website\index.php on line 547

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at D:\Websites\rave.ca\website\include\functions\visitors.php:5) in D:\Websites\rave.ca\website\index.php on line 548
US WA: Court Strengthens Safeguards Against Searches - Rave.ca
Rave Radio: Offline (0/0)
Email: Password:
Anonymous
New Account
Forgot Password
News (Media Awareness Project) - US WA: Court Strengthens Safeguards Against Searches
Title:US WA: Court Strengthens Safeguards Against Searches
Published On:2005-12-02
Source:Oregonian, The (Portland, OR)
Fetched On:2008-01-14 22:27:47
COURT STRENGTHENS SAFEGUARDS AGAINST SEARCHES

OLYMPIA, Wash. -- A unanimous state Supreme Court, buttressing the
state's strict limits on warrantless searches, said Thursday that a
roommate or houseguest can give only limited permission for a search.

The court threw out a methamphetamine possession conviction of an
Everett man, Robert John Morse. The opinion put police on notice that
they must be careful in obtaining permission to do searches when they
don't have a warrant.

Both federal and state constitutions generally view warrantless
searches as unreasonable and allow only narrow exceptions.

"Exceptions to the warrant requirement are jealously and carefully
drawn," Justice Tom Chambers wrote for the court.

The high court said a houseguest or roommate can authorize a search
of the common areas, but not the bedroom or other spaces where the
owner or leaseholder expects privacy.

"Because a person's expectation of privacy is necessarily reduced
when authority to control a space is shared with others, such persons
necessarily assume some risk that others with authority to do so will
allow outsiders into shared areas," Chambers wrote.

The case involved the search of Morse's apartment in Everett in 2002.
Officers were actually looking for someone else, a woman wanted on
felony warrants. Morse's houseguest answered the door and let police
in to look for the woman.

Officers went into the master bedroom and spotted Morse and some
drugs and drug paraphernalia. Morse consented to a search after he
was arrested, and was convicted of drug possession. He appealed,
arguing that police failed to get his permission before entering and
searching his bedroom. He said police should have asked him, not his
guest, for permission.

The Court of Appeals rejected both arguments, but the high court
overturned the lower courts and threw out the conviction.

His attorney, Susan Wilk of the Washington Appellate Project in
Seattle, said Morse has been free on appeal, and will not have to
serve the 30-day sentence that had been imposed for a first-time offender.

Morse, now in his early 30s, is staying out of trouble, she said.
Morse has Juvenile Parkinson's Disease and uses a wheelchair, she said.

The case is an important clarification of the law, she said in an interview.

"It basically underscores the warrant requirement, and really places
the burden on police to make reasonable inquiries about the person
who answers the door," she said. "Is it, as the court quaintly put
it, the man or woman of the house or someone else?"

Justice Mary Fairhurst, in a separate opinion, agreed with the
court's decision to overturn the conviction, but said the temporary
houseguest didn't have the authority to let the police search the
residence in the first place.

The case is State v. Robert John Morse, Docket No. 75915-4.
Member Comments
No member comments available...