streat v bauer; streat v blanco case law

TC may have been negligent about enabling a gun enclosed in a backpack to discharge. Sophie Dagg holds a Bachelor of Laws through Central Queensland University. at 12. The majority rejected Bauer's vagueness argument. State v. Chester, a case much cited by Bauer, illustrates this distinction. That factual summary was based on a review of the police reports, discovery and other material received thus far from the Kitsap County Prosecutor's Office. CP at 49. Once again, the initial act was not only intentional, but felonious, and capable of causing harm in and of itself. There are also certain things you can do, if going to court, for a drug possession charge, to maximise your chances at getting a s10 non conviction. at 1250. reasonable suspicion involvesless than a reasonable belief but more than a possibility. Contact us. Appellate Division, Second Department. In Queensland the police generally are not allowed to enter your premises. The trial court dismissed the State's charge of unlawful possession of a firearm, the State did not appeal that decision, and it is therefore not before us. Over 170 people were charged with drug offences at the Field Day Music Festival at the Domain on 1 January 2018. Any negligence on Bauer's part thus does not meet the definition of culpability for the crime required by RCW 9A.08.020(2)(a). What does Streat mean? We therefore concluded that legal cause was lacking because Young went home, went to sleep, and became intoxicated before criminally causing the accident injuring plaintiff the day after the theft. Id. at 608. The legislature has provided the following rule for interpreting such criminal statutes: [t]he provisions of the common law relating to the commission of crime and the punishment thereof, insofar as not inconsistent with the Constitution and statutes of this state, shall supplement all penal statutes of this state RCW 9A.04.060. The gun belonged to Bauer.1 TC brought that loaded gun to school in his backpack a few days after he stole it. We agree. 21 Neither party has identified a Washington case upholding criminal liability on facts like the ones on which the Bauer prosecution is based. 10 Bauer sought discretionary review by this court, and we granted it. At FindLaw.com, we pride ourselves on being the number one source of free legal information and resources on the web. 427, 43031, 157 P.3d 879 (2007). CP at 142. Wayne and Kenneth Bauer appeal from a judgment following a nonjury trial in favor of Bruce Bauer and West Coast Vending Service, Inc. (West Coast), on Wayne and Kenneth's complaint for . Under that prong, a person is guilty of a crime if it is committed by the conduct of another when, [a]cting with the kind of culpability that is sufficient for the commission of the crime, he or she causes an innocent or irresponsible person to engage in such conduct. RCW 9A .08.020(2)(a) (emphasis added). Call our lawyers now or, have our lawyers call you. What Happens if You Fail or Refuse to Comply with a Search? In Australia, police generally do not have the power to stop and detain you for the purposes of a search. RCW 9A.36.031(1)(d). 94 Wn.App. In order to do so you would need to show that police did not have a reasonable suspicion to justify searching you. Morning of disclosure 3. Queensland Bacon Pty Ltd v Rees - [1966] HCA 21: Home. The former is intended to impose punishment in appropriate cases while the latter is primarily concerned with who shall bear the burden of a loss. Street v Bauer ; Streat v Blanco - the question is whether a reasonable man would be of that opinion having regard to the information which was in the mind of the arresting officer Belief Streat v Blanco - Subjective Test - Genuine suspicion in own mind -Objective test - Reasonable grounds for the suspicion Reasonable Suspicion R v RONDO 37 We hold that the Court of Appeals erred in determining that Bauer could be liable under RCW 9A.08.020(2)(a). Bauer, 174 Wn.App. The arsonist, however, intentionally started the fireclearly an intentional criminal act capable of causing harm in and of itself. That portion of the assault statute states that a person is guilty of third degree assault who, [w]ith criminal negligence, causes bodily harm to another person by means of a weapon or other instrument or thing likely to produce bodily harm. RCW 9A.36.031(1)(d). 00-421. Are you wondering whether the police were entitled to do so? In New South Wales, the Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 empowers police to stop, search and detain you where they have reasonable grounds or a reasonable suspicion that you have committed an offence. 2.2.2. The police hold a reasonable suspicion you are, or have committed an offence, or breached your bail conditions; or, Police believe youre about to commit a breach of the peace; or, Prevent you from repeating or continuing an offence, or committing a further offence; or, Prevent the evidence from being concealed, lost or destroyed; or, Prevent interference with, or harassment of potential witnesses; or, Stop you from running away from police or location of the offence; or. The State also charged Bauer with TC's unlawful possession of a firearm, relying on the complicity statute, which states in relevant part that a person is liable for the criminal conduct of another if, [a]cting with the kind of culpability that is sufficient for the commission of the crime, he or she causes an innocent or irresponsible person to engage in such conduct. RCW 9A.08.020(2)(a). Streat v Bauer (Supreme Court (NSW), Smart J, 16 March 1998, unreported) Thompson; Hsu v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [1998] QB 498. The trial court agreed with the State and denied the motion to dismiss but then certified the matter to the Court of Appeals. Our case law suggests that legal causation does not extend as far in criminal cases as it does in tort cases, and even our civil cases do not extend liability as far as the State seeks to do in this case. Essentially, if the police find prohibited drugs on you after illegally searching you (without a reasonable suspicion on any of the above grounds), your charge can ultimately be either dropped early, or dismissed in court- on a not guilty verdict. Facts: Orally agreed (and got paid to-roughly 300$ a month) care for a sick, elderly man. What Happens During Examination-in-Chief? 15 This court, in agreement with commentators and other jurisdictions, has observed that as to cause in fact, tort and criminal situations are exactly alike. Dennison, 115 Wn.2d at 624 n. 15 (citing LaFave & Scott, supra, at 397 n. 31). Legal causation, on the other hand,, involves a determination of whether liability should attach as a matter of law given the existence of cause in fact. What the majority believes to be the intervening actions and attenuating circumstances in this case are the natural and foreseeable consequences of the very danger that Bauer's careless actions created. Reporting Police Misconduct in Queensland. It is possible for this common law right to be curtailed by statute in appropriate circumstances. Streat v Bauer; Streat v Blanco (unreported, Supreme Court, NSW, Smart J, Nos 13686, 13687 of 1996, 16 March 1998); Queensland Bacon Pty Ltd v Rees (1966) 115 CLR 266 at 303 per Kitto J; George v Rockett (1990) 170 CLR 104 at 115-116; 48 A Crim R 246 at 253-254 ; ; Armstrong (1989) 53 SASR 25 at 27; O'Hara v Chief Constable of Royal Ulster . Id. First, RCW 9A.08.020(2)(a) requires proof that the defendant acted with the same mens rea as that required for the crime. We have previously interpreted the words the crime in other subsections of the complicity statute very narrowly. 1. Generally, exercising this right cannot be used against you. The assault statute does not define the term cause. We therefore turn to the common law relating to the commission of crime and the punishment thereof to supplement that provision. We now reverse the Court of Appeals. Since a third degree assault charge requires only a culpability of criminal negligence,11 the Court of Appeals reasoned that Bauer could be liable for TC's conduct if he caused that conduct: Here, the State has produced evidence that would support a jury's determination that Bauer caused TC's conduct. If you want to go ahead and book a fact-to-face appointment, we will connect you with a specialist in your local area no matter where you are and even at very short notice. We determine the best way forward in your legal matter, free of charge. The Court of Appeals ruled that the parents were not civilly liable for that result. 741, 249 P.3d 680 (2011). The sub-contract required Bauer to submit to Maeda, in relation to any claim for additional payment, a notice of the 'contractual basis' of the claim (the 'Notice'), together with full and detailed particulars and its evaluation of the claim, within 28 days of an initial notification. Given that both science and common sense strongly suggest that Bauer was in the best position to prevent the injury to TC's classmate and that his conduct was its primary cause, I would not preclude Bauer's liability on legal causation grounds and would allow a jury to resolve the matter. 160 Wn.App. An accused person is innocent until proven guilty. The most analogous criminal case that we have found is from Iowa: State v. Ayers, 478 N.W.2d 606 (Iowa 1991). If you require legal advice or representation in a criminal law matter or in any other legal matter, please contact Go To Court Lawyers. Bauer's negligence was thus not the same as the culpability required for the crime; it might have been equally negligent, but not as to the same act, result, and balancing of costs and benefits. Commentators and courts recognize that criminal law and tort law serve different purposes and therefore have different principles of legal causation. 2021 NY Slip Op 05557 [198 AD3d 750] October 13, 2021. 47 With these observations, I respectfully dissent. We therefore reverse the decision of the Court of Appeals. State v. Bauer, 174 Wn.App. Id. 7. Since any negligence on his part was not culpability sufficient for the commission of the crime, id., Bauer cannot be liable under prong (2)(a). At common law, the privilege of self-incrimination is a persons fundamental right not to be compelled to provide documents or answer questions in circumstances where the information or answers may incriminate the person. Matter of Batts v Muhammad (2021 NY Slip Op 05557) Matter of Batts v Muhammad. Login . Some general rules about using drug detection dogs by police, is included in s. 150, and include: 4. Under s. 138 Law Enforcement (Powers And Responsibilities) Act 2002 (NSW), the police officer (of the rank of sergeant or above), may request a doctor to examine you for the purposes of getting evidence in respect to the commission of an offence if: The police officer who made the request is of the rank of a sergeant or above; and, You are in lawful custody, and charged with an offence; and, There are reasonable grounds to believe that an examination may provide evidence in respect to the commission of an offence; and, This applies even if you dont give consent to police, The police officer must provide you evidence he/she is a police officer, unless he/she is in police uniform, The police officer must provide you with his/her name, and place of duty, The police officer must provide you with reasons for conducting the search on you. YUwISd| 7{PXpx i\Sw,.&WKd c-i:-TY'7*rtq? RCW 9A.36.031(1)(d). But it does not need to charge accomplice liability to seek an accomplice liability instruction, and the Court of Appeals addressed the availability of such an instruction. The below are 10 things you should be aware of, if ever faced with being approached by police at a music festival, in relation to drug possession. 760 views See State v. Montano, 169 Wn.2d 872, 876, 239 P.3d 360 (2010) (citing State v. Conte, 159 Wn.2d 797, 803, 154 P.3d 194 (2007)). State of NSW v Abed [2014] NSWCA 419. They meticulously planned and methodologically approached my case with utmost care with an empathetic approach. at 714. 4 A staff member noticed a backpack on TC's desk. See, e.g., Hall, supra, at 29495 (describing Justice Holmes's view that identical policies underlie both tort and criminal law). 34 The Court of Appeals concluded, however, that the State could seek to convict Bauer under the innocent or irresponsible person prong of the complicity statute, that is, RCW 9A.08.020(2)(a). There must be something which . We note, however, that knowing possession is an essential element of the crime of unlawful possession of a firearm. The officers then saw Rondo reach over and place something in the glove box of the vehicle. at 92829. This formed the basis for a reasonable suspicion for the officers to search Rondos car. Bauer, 174 Wn.App. Id. Still, this court found that proximate cause was lacking. Id. at 8081. But that [t]his court has found no Washington case upholding liability where the accused did not actively participate in the immediate physical impetus of harm is not a compelling argument against whether the legislature intended to criminalize this sort of carelessness. It was the result of new and independent forces. 32 The complicity statute establishes vicarious criminal liability in three situations: accomplice liability (RCW 9A.08.020(2)(c)); when a criminal statute itself expressly provides for vicarious liability (RCW 9A.08.020(2)(b)); and by caus[ing] an innocent person to do the illegal act (RCW 9A.08.020(2)(a)). Id. In that case, Ayers was a firearm vendor convicted of involuntary manslaughter for selling a gun to a minor. Some factual basis for the suspicion must be shown. 29 Bauer asserts that where injury is caused by a third party, the State may charge a person other than that third party with a crime only under the complicity statute and that the complicity statute does not reach Bauer's conduct. McGUINESS, J. Characterizing the question as one of proximate cause, we held: Here it is plain the accident which caused plaintiff's injuries was not a part of the natural and continuous sequence of events which flowed from respondents' act in leaving their station wagon in the parking lot. These locations are either businesses we photographed for. 31 As to the second pointwhether complicity liability is available in this casethe Court of Appeals is mistaken. 38 The legislature defined the crime of third degree assault to reach a person who [w]ith criminal negligence, causes bodily harm to another person by means of a weapon or other instrument or thing likely to produce bodily harm. RCW 9A.36.031(1)(d). During those 6 hours, police must release you (with or without bail conditions), or bring you before the Court. It carries a maximum penalty of up to 2 years imprisonment and/or a penalty of up to $2,200 fine. Without a warrant police can only come into your premises or search your vehicle if you allow them to, or if they . Search warrants provide Australian police with the right to enter a persons premises for the purpose of investigating criminal matters. On a later search of Rondos home, police located 215 grams of cannabis and 59 cannabis plants. You may not want to answer any police questions because of embarrassment, protecting another person from incrimination, or concerns that police may not accurately record your answers. We agree. Licensed health care practitioner means a physician, as defined in Section 1861 (r) (1) of the Social Security Act, a registered professional nurse, licensed social worker or other individual who meets requirements prescribed by the Secretary of the Treasury. There are, however, a number of special powers police have which allow them to compel a person to submit to a personal search, depending on the state and territory. 2010 2023 Go To Court Pty Ltd. All rights reserved. TC explained that he had been visiting his mother and her boyfriend Bauer in their home for the past three years, since he was six years old. Complaints about police misconduct in Western Australia are generally made to theWA Policeat either local or district level, or directly to thePolice Complaints Unit(PCU). A reasonable suspicion, according to the case of R v Rondo [2001] NSWCCA 540, is where there is less than a reasonable belief, but more than a possibility in the mind of the officer (i.e. In answering that question regard must be had to thesource of the information and its content, seen in the light of the whole of the surrounding circumstances.. These weapons were easily accessible to his girl friend's minor children, including TC, a nine-year-old boy who frequently visited and sometimes stayed the night. Note that most jurisdictions use the term proximate cause to mean something similar to what we call legal cause; whereas in Washington, proximate cause means both cause in fact and legal cause together. Knapstad, 107 Wn.2d at 35657. This article deals with personal searches in Victoria. 12. This protection reflects the importance the law gives to our right to be free from the deprivation of liberty. 6. In the case of Streat v Bauer; Streat v Blanco, the defendants were charged with hindering police after police pulled their car over and they were searched. TC pleaded guilty in juvenile court to reckless endangerment and was sentenced to probation and counseling. State v. Anderson, 141 Wn.2d 357, 366, 5 P.3d 1247 (2000). Decided: December 06, 2001 For Appellant: Jeremy S. Yellin, Attorney at Law, Fort Benton, MT. Bauer did not notice his handgun was missing until after the shooting. See majority at 15, 20. 6 Police also interviewed TC's mother and Bauer, along with TC's siblings. State of New South Wales v Bouffler [2017] NSWCA 185. 88559-1. The Court of Appeals found that the State could rely on both principal and complicity liability. 23 As discussed above, there is no criminal case in Washington upholding criminal liability based on a negligent act that has such intervening facts as in this case between the original negligence and the final, specific, injurious result. Reporting Police Misconduct in South Australia. FindLaw.com Free, trusted legal information for consumers and legal professionals, SuperLawyers.com Directory of U.S. attorneys with the exclusive Super Lawyers rating, Abogado.com The #1 Spanish-language legal website for consumers, LawInfo.com Nationwide attorney directory and legal consumer resources. Your parent or guardian can be present during the search, if its reasonably practicable in the circumstances, if you have no objections. WE CONCUR: MADSEN, C.J., C. JOHNSON, and OWENS, JJ., J.M. Commonwealth ex rel. It is always a good idea to get legal advice before making any decision to talk to police. Smith v. Myers, 438 Pa. 218, 232, 261 A.2d 550 (1970). General rules for personal searches in Victoria Police have the power to search a person or their . A search warrant is a written authority allowing police to enter premises. 549, 558, 185 N.W.2d 576 (1971) (In criminal prosecutions there must be a more direct causal connection between the criminal conduct of the defendant and the homicide charged than is required by the tort liability concept of proximate cause.). Stay up-to-date with how the law affects your life. Frisk Search: Police running his/her hand over your outer clothing, or with an electronic metal detector, and an examination of your clothes where those clothes are conveniently and voluntarily removed by you. As discussed supra Part A.iii, immediately above, the State cannot do so on the facts of this case. Because there is no evidence of such knowledge in this case, the Court of Appeals held, the State could not seek to convict Bauer as an accomplice. In Queensland, police are subject to the laws about corrupt conduct and police misconduct under theCrime and Corruption Act 2001. If you are over 10 but under 18 years of age, or if you are impaired intellectually, your parent or guardian must be present during the search, unless, the officer suspects on reasonable grounds that delaying the search is likely to result in evidence being concealed or destroyed, or an immediate search is necessary to protect the safety of a person. STATE of Washington, Respondent, v. Douglas L. BAUER, Petitioner. To be clear, this opinion will refer to the two different types of causation as legal cause and cause in fact unless otherwise noted. The whole CDLA team are highly recommend for anyone seeking legal advice and support. We explained that [e]ven if it were negligent for Budget to leave the keys inside of its minivan, the responsibility for such negligence must terminate at some time in the future Id. Bauer, 174 Wn.App. At some point the police stopped the accused and his companion and whilst they were so stopped searched them. The gun discharged as TC was rummaging in his pack at the end of the day. Secondly: It will result in an offence under s. 199 Law Enforcement (Powers And Responsibilities) Act 2002 (NSW). 24 For example, in Sailor v. Ohlde, this court addressed whether the owner of an automobile who leaves the key in the ignition switch [can be civilly] liable for injury or damage caused by a stranger who enters upon private property and steals the automobile. 71 Wn.2d 646, 647, 430 P.2d 591 (1967). Id. at 7677. at 77. Id. 16 Legal causation, however, is different. Id. The court held, More is required than appears here to support a showing of proximate cause in a manslaughter case. 36 Second, there is a difference between caus[ing] a particular result and caus[ing] another actor to engage in conductand the latter is what RCW 9A.08.020(2)(a) requires. Bauer, 174 Wn.App. However, the trial judge recognized that this ruling involves a controlling question of law as to which there is substantial ground for a difference of opinion and certified the questions to the Court of Appeals. In State v. PerezCervantes, we held that a person who stabs another may be liable for the other's death even if drug abuse also contributed to the death. This Act requires that most police complaints, other than the most serious, are to be dealt with by the Queensland Police Service (QPS). By its plain language, the purpose of the statute is to impose liability when injury is caused by criminal negligence, not criminal intent or felonious action. 27 Finally, the Washington tort case most closely analogous to the one at hand, McGrane v. Cline, also supports our holding that Bauer is not liable for third degree assault in this case. What Kind of Personal Searches Can Police Do? Bauer is not related to TC and is not TC's guardian. Police said they had a reasonable suspicion because of the time and place, the fact that three men were in in the car, and a suggestion from police radio that it was a suspect vehicle that may be involved in offences. Reasonable suspicion is not formed arbitrarily. The bullet struck TC's classmate, and it seriously injured her. 8. 9 The Court of Appeals affirmed in a split decision. 143 Wn.2d 190, 15 P.3d 1283 (2001). at 1248. Only the things known to the officer at the time he/she expertises his/her power. Two officers pulled Rondo over and enquired about some rear panel damage to the vehicle. Under s. 34 Law Enforcement (Powers And Responsibilities) Act 2002 (NSW), the police must not strip search a person under the age of 10 years. On the basis of Streat v Bauer, Streat V Blanco to conduct a lawful vehicle stop the police officer needed to have formed a genuine suspicion in his own mind (subjective test) of which a reasonable person (objective test) armed with the same information as the officer would be of the same opinion. Though this presumption may be removed, see id., and I do not seek to address the appropriateness of the liability imposed on TC, it is unsettling that TC, as a matter of law, will face more criminal culpability in this situation than Bauer. The Court of Appeals did not address whether TC was an innocent or irresponsible person; since the record is insufficient for us to make that determination, we do not address it either. STATE of Montana, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Laurence Joe BAUER, Jr., Defendant and Appellant. he (read full review), Alex and the CDLA team were honest and direct with me for the entirety of my case. The email address cannot be subscribed. When Bauer's gun ownership and method of storage is combined with the known presence of an unsupervised nine-year-old boy, especially when coupled with a failure to notice the unsecured weapon was missing, a jury, not a judge, should decide if this created a substantial risk that a wrongful act may occur. at 777. 138 Wn.App. State v. Stein, 144 Wn.2d 236, 245, 27 P.3d 184 (2001) (quoting RCW 9A.08.020(3)(a)). Copyright 2023, Thomson Reuters. now Mr. Jimmy Singh is the Principal Lawyer at Criminal Defence Lawyers Australia - Leading Criminal Lawyers in Sydney, Delivering Exceptional Results in all Australian Criminal Courts. This does not include examination of your body cavities. Id. There are also specific rules with respect to Commonwealth crimes and search warrants issues with respect to investigating Commonwealth crimes. k p+nHxrR;rDyNX7#i##. Note that this case discusses legal causation in the civil, not criminal, context. He asserted that the shooting was accidental. I disagree. The toy hauler version with hatch based on the Flying Cloud chasis. Thank you for your enquiry. Police must allow you to speak to a lawyer before investigations (including any questioning) takes place. There must besomething which would create in the mind of a reasonable person an apprehension or fear A reason to suspect that a fact exists is more than a reason to consider or look into the possibility of its existence.. Type Nach der Typenstudie Isaacs50 lassen sich bei einigen Buchstaben besonders deutliche Unterschiede zwischen den verwendeten Schriftstzen feststellen; in den Eulenspiegel-Drucken Coplands handelt es sich dabei v. a. um das v und das w/W. We have said that the crime means intent to promote the crime that was actually charged, not just any crime. While it is not clear that the State will seek to instruct the jury under this section in this case, the facts of the case at this stage do not preclude it from doing so. Bashir kept me updated all the time. The missing ingredient is a more direct connection between Ayers and the act which killed the young victim. Id. Because legal causation in civil cases is broader and more flexible than it is in criminal cases, these civil cases compel the conclusion that legal causation is not satisfied as to Bauer in this case. That was appropriate. Copy Link. 19 No appellate criminal case in Washington has found legal causation based on negligent acts similar to those in the civil cases above that were incapable of causing injury directly. Learn more about FindLaws newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy. Bauer also did not notice that this loaded weapon had been taken for two days as TC toted it in his backpack to and from school. Their statements corroborate TC's statements that there were multiple unsecured and loaded guns around the house. Have you been pulled over by the police and had your vehicle searched? Charged with a Drug Possession offence is daunting. 2015 Airstream Eddie Bauer $80,000 Aston, Pennsylvania Streat v Bauer; Streat v Blanco The question is whether a reasonable man would be of that opinion having regard to the information which was in the mind of the arresting officer. Id. Cf. In part it is also an objective one, because there must also be reasonable grounds for the suspicion. If the factual basis the officer searched you on is weak or inadmissible (because it was illegally obtained), then the suspicion may not be reasonable. A reason to suspect that you have a prohibited drug in your possession, needs to be based on a factual basis. Bauer may have been negligent about leaving loaded guns out in the presence of children. It contained a gun. 1 TC, a child, took a loaded gun from the home where his mother lived with her boyfriend, Douglas Bauer. 42 A different study, which measured the association of household firearm storage practices and the risk of unintentional and self-inflicted injuries associated with child or adolescent access to firearms in the home, also supports the conclusion that we should not preclude liability on legal causation grounds. 438, 45051, 444 A.2d 1034 (1982) ([T]he tort liability concept of proximate cause is generally too broad and comprehensive to be appropriate in a criminal proceeding); People v. Kibbe, 35 N.Y.2d 407, 413, 321 N.E.2d 773, 362 N.Y.S.2d 848 (1974) (We subscribe to the requirement that the defendants' actions must be a sufficiently direct cause of the ensuing death before there can be any imposition of criminal liability, and recognize, of course, that this standard is greater than that required to serve as a basis for tort liability.); People v. Scott, 29 Mich.App. 5. The two men were in the vicinity and police believed had been in attendance at the Tank Nightclub which had a reputation among police as a well known establishment for drug users. Bauer's Knapstad motion to dismiss was based on the factual summary provided in defense counsel's affidavit attached to the motion. Because we resolve the case on those grounds, we do not reach Bauer's vagueness challenge. Rondo advised the officers that the car belonged to his mother. The legislature has made this policy judgment in RCW 9A.36.031(1)(d). No. Id. TC's actions are not distinct from Bauer's carelessness for legal causation purposes. In a split decision, the Court of Appeals upheld the trial court's ruling. In addition, we noted that where other jurisdictions had found liability, most have not involved the type of attenuated facts present here. Id. 11. 114 Wn.2d 700, 705, 790 P.2d 160 (1990). Thank you so much for helping me through my toughest time (read full review), I had a very pleasing experience with CDLA team. For it to be reasonable, there needs to be something that would create an apprehension or fear in the mind of a reasonable person that, for example, you have a prohibited drug in your possession. If this does occur it is . A search warrant is the written authority from a judicial officer which gives the police the power to enter the premises named in the warrant and search them.

Bondo Fiberglass Resin Mixing Ratio, The Root Directory Is The Main List Of Quizlet, Town Of Cicero Parking Tickets, Hebron Marching Band Investigation, Articles S

streat v bauer; streat v blanco case law