Good talk but also academic. In the real world several states have no speedy trial clause of any kind and can keep an individual locked up indefinitely. In addition we currently have hundreds if not thousand of citizens in jail without trial for years on end, no days, or weeks or months by years. This is not a speedy trial. The fact that you can be arrested by a handful of people or less, locked up in jail for years without trial means the system is broken. I would love to see your explanation for those cases. You even sort of mention it when you say there isn't a exact time limit but when the courts kind of think it might be an issue. Well the courts are never in a hurry to do anything, they are not sitting in jail for years on end while someone at a desk shuffles papers and leaves early on a Friday.
i did not concent in a vehical nor peorson search, so they get the k-9 dog to run the whole time the dog was trying to pull away the officer kept pointing and saying here, he put dog up and told me their is your fucking warrant, then searched myself my car and my purse also searched my 2 passangers without concent. i was cuffed put in cruiser and ask if i would work for them , i was detained in cuffs in cruiser for 45 min setting on site of stop mean while they asl me 3 more time if i wanted to work out a dealnever did the officer or k=9 cop read me my miranda rights/. then a under cover pulls up i was ask if id talk to him i said ill talk to everyone, i stated to undercover i dont do drugs, buy drugs, nior sell drugs i can not help you, the under cover read me the miranda then 5 min later i hear 9 christy sargent an officer opens door uncuffs me gives me a citation and sent me walking, they towed my car 10n min fter stop and sent my two passangers walking at same time is any of this legal, i feel my right were violated along with my passangers, i feel my property was seized unlawfuly, and i feel i was detained in cuff on traffic stop site unlawfuly, the cop tried to bully me into being an informant
i have no drug history i raised 7 kids and have 9 grandkids cops had no reason to belive i was on drugs or commiting a crime a bogus reason for the stop was implied on citation it stated ins verify stop same 2 cops puklled me over april 4th and seen ins card, reg, and license
Blanket statements of just prosecuting all charges because they happen to have a DV designation is also dangerous. People lie and exaggerate. Peoples lives can change forever with that stigma. There should actually be to consider the facts and the other side of the story. Obviously I’m not promoting violence, but just assuming that somebody is guilty because it has a DV designation, and therefore should be prosecuted is a miscarriage of justice.
Absolute worse case law on the books; uneducated with life experience will deem this case law gods gift on earth. This has excused mountains of unlawful detainment on innocent people from LAW ENFORCEMENT. This case law should be overturned; return to actual evidence of a crime; not instilling 'probable cause' as evidence.
2001 illegal wire taps. 2016 Due process violation 4th 5th 6th 14th Amendment violation. A Writ of habeas corpus a violation of my constitution rights violated 2019
This video should be taken down, because a license to practice law well is not a law lmfao, its a secure right to practice law, we should all educated under the law, so please explain are we talking law or some form of commercial policy, and is a bar memeber ship car a sign thay your part of a gang to hide certain shit from the public, like if a man can be fooled then let him be fooled right, so who is lying if my attorney does not have its clientsbest interest.. or wont make certain argumentssssssssssss, nit that it should be an argument with the language being the real issue........
Fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine: A rule under which evidence that is the direct result of illegal conduct on the part of an official is inadmissible in a criminal trial against the victim of the conduct.
Inventory searches are never for anything other than evidence gathering. If you can reasonably seal a crime scene using items like tape them you can reasonably seal a car's doors and trunk with the same that will show if the car has been tampered with.
The courts and law enforcement are also in violation of the 14th amendment section 1 if they illegally search any American citizen, their house, papers or effects (personal property) without a legal lawful search warrant signed by a judge under oath and affirmation. 14th amendment section 1 No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the united states
The fourth amendment text explicitly states unreasonable searches and seizures "SHALL NOT BE violated " therefore the only reasonable search and seizure is only with a legal lawful search warrant.
@@panama2468 the right of the people to be secure in their persons (that means their bodies), houses,papers (that means every document they own, possess), effects (everything a citizen owns, their vehicle is their effects) against unreasonable searches and seizures ""SHALL NOT BE VIOLATED "". The fourth amendment explicitly states NO WARRANT SHALL BE ISSUED BUT UPON PROBABLE CAUSE Therefore the only reasonable search or seizure is only done so with a legal lawful valid warrant, and probable cause is only to get said warrant.
@@panama2468 legally under the fourth amendment all officers/officials should have a legal lawful warrant before they even ask for any form of ID, driver's license, insurance, registration, title, deed, contract they are all papers(documents) and therefore protected under the warrant clause. The fact that they do so without a legal lawful warrant is unconstitutional and therefore illegal.
@@panama2468 a tery search without a legal lawful warrant is unconstitutional therefore illegal in violation of the 4th amendment warrant clause. As well as the 14th amendment section 1.
These people don't know a bloody thing about constitutional law,most of them their reading comprehension is pathetic. The fourth amendment text explicitly states no warrant shall issue but upon probable cause. Reasonable suspicion exists nowhere in the 4th amendment text of the constitution of the united states of America supreme law of the land.
Your car is your effects,the things in your pockets are your effects your body is your person, your ID, driver's license, insurance, registration are your papers,all protected under the 4th amendment warrant clause there is no probable cause to search anyone or anything without a legal lawful search warrant.
Right. Someone runs a red light in front of a cop. The cop should be required to get an arrest warrant for the driver before initiating a traffic stop. Cop comes upon a homeless person stabbing another homeless person. Cop should get an arrest warrant first instead of stopping the threat or detaining the suspect. Cop responds to a domestic disturbance and hears a female screaming for her life. Cop should turn around, leave, and go get a search warrant and arrest warrant first before entering. All of those warrant affidavits would be thrown out based on particularity because you don’t know who anyone is because you didn’t identify any of them. In your fairy tale world the cop would never be able to compel identification because he could never detain any of the suspects under reasonable suspicion.
@@seanmcmillan3455 there is no such thing as reasonable suspicion under the 4th amendment warrant clause, probable cause is only to get a legal lawful warrant. Therefore yes they by law should have to get a legal lawful warrant to arrest anyone. They can detain the person hold them there until they get said warrant from a judge if the judge decides it is legal. They have cell phones and fax machines/printers they can easily call a judge and give the details and name of the person that judge can issue said warrant to them to arrest (seize) or search said person or search and seize their property (effects), there is no excuse for any officer not to get one.
So you completely ignore the fact (or don’t realize) that a detention is a seizure. Your example would have a cop, under your definition/understanding, illegally seize a person without a warrant so he could get a warrant to legally seize him. And not every jurisdiction in the US has the capacity or even allows for telephonic or electronic warrants. There are a lot of areas that still wake up a judge in the middle of the night if necessary. So now you would require that for EVERY SINGLE arrest. I also don’t know where in the 4th Amendment it says a warrant is required for an arrest. Oh yes I do. It doesn’t. It says probable cause is required for a warrant. It doesn’t talk about arrests. You’re adding things that aren’t there. You also ignored my point about traffic stops.
4th amendment text explicitly states probable cause is only to get a legal lawful search warrant nothing more. The justice department (courts), and law enforcement have been operating illegally unconstitutionally for the past 100 years.
what about things like letting them see a clock or use their phones or the conditions of the jail (say the bedding)? also getting more chances to make phone calls. are there any appeals about these recently?
You and I could pass as brothers! But not important; however, when you use red, I can not read your slides. Color blindness triggered by red is signifenty higher than other colors.
Wow sounds like a real free country....mean while prison overflowing massive problem most non violent.... Who is to say what not to say when to say specially when ya find out how they live behind close doors . Conspiracy more less in lame terms means Officer Biden and procicuter Trump don't got no evidence or leads just here say or a hunch. So they slap a conspiracy on Jane and john Doe with a possession charge. Resulting in felony charge and loosing k separating many families.... Protect the prison complex by serving corrupted Powers In evil they trust! I'd like to see them put in a cage for this conspiracy crap. It makes cops and detectives lazy and unethical.
the prosecutor has a duty to investigate things that counter their argument MY prosecutor, a DA, not only withheld evidence, but evidence that disproves their circumstantial evidence and theory, flipping it 180 degree from what they presented the state also edited evidence to make me look guilty my lawyer said it doesn't count cause the detective did it, how did he know the detective did it? my lawyer didn't even object to the prosecutor saying I was guilty to the jury
Reasonable articulatable suspicion of what? Ras is an incomplete idea at law Ras that a crime is was or will be comitted by me in an officers view or presence. (Texas) 27 state legislatures have given their citizens a absolute right to carry a pistol on their person concealed or open. Therefore the terry language burden can not be met. I.e..armed and dangerous, for in over half the states being armed is lawful. Therefore a patdown can only turn on being dangerous. And that is a specific type of crime. Crime is the nexus of interaction.. The condition of 1965 ohio have forever changed. Time to get into the present with present day conditions and theory that stems fro the same. Not your mothers legal precidents fron 58 years ago.
Would it be fair to say the terry versus Ohio was supposed to be a shield and now being used as a sword, and that the Lower threshold of reasonable articulable suspicion, Rather than probable cause is being abused against innocent American citizens by bullies
27 state legislators have given their citizens the right to carry a pistol openly or concealed. The armed and dangerous portion of terry vs ohio is moot because the legislature has given the right to carry a pistol. Therefore there is no criminality with having a pistol on your body in these 27 states. 1965 has long come and gone, its now time to get current with current conditions. Imlo.
Don't you love how easy it is for cops to charge you with a crime and how impossible they make it to defend yourself? They immediately treat you like a criminal and say you waive your rights if you don't know what they are or don't know the rules of court.. somehow the constitution is void if police don't know the laws they are enforcing.. it's called the good faith exemption.. really? And the Supreme Court thinks this is reasonable..
The reason why Washington's appeal failed was because even with the mitigating circumstances of his earlier life that shouldve been presented and even with the worst lawyer in the world was was because none of it would have been enough to have significantly changed the out come....at least we got the two prong standard tho....feel for washington tho....RIP criminal...
arent the inventory and or reurn and or report required ot be given to all people who lived at a property house when they ask for it? i have asked for 20 months and still got nothing from 4 police offices - search warant officers, property room, investigator case file manager, and DA office
hi so i roomate had a search warrant, then cops show up to search the whole house and his name only, then they find out their are 3 renters there right before they start, they then go in all their bedrooms and take their stuff, 1 year later all charges are dropped on the roomate, jnone of the other 3 roomates ever had any charges on them or their items taken. So if a search warrant police officers have but have never given to the 3 people a copy of the search warrant - extension ammendment - so pertaining to them and their rooms - after 20 months = 6 months after the case is over - doesn't that in invalidate it? how do they have the right to take anythig when they said they would give a copy within a few days and never did despite several opportunites and a bunch of requests for it
