Homestead mailing list

[bobf <bobford79 AT yahoo.com>]

I do not understand this ruling. By the way, if the topic of Supreme Court 
rulings on individual liberties doesn not interest you, please feel free to 
delete, now. I will not try to explain other than to say it weas an invalid 
warrant -- a mistake-- but SCOTUS says the evidence found during the illegal 
raid is now admissable.  Expect many more 'mistakes' from the armed agents of 
the state.   I do not understand why 'strict Constitutionalists' like Scalia 
and Thomas  would rule with the affirmative in this decision.  This is one of 
the worst SCOTUS rulings I can remember.  This is just terrible.  PFFFT.  
From today's NYT.........

----------------------------------------------------------------------


Supreme Court Says Evidence Is Valid Despite Police Error 

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Published: January 14, 2009 
Filed at 11:35 a.m. ET


Justices Turn to Rights of Defendants (January 14, 2009) 
Text of the Opinion: Herring v. United States (pdf)WASHINGTON (AP) -- The 
Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that evidence found after an arrest based on 
incorrect information from police files may be used against a criminal 
suspect.

In a 5-4 split, the court upheld the conviction of an Alabama man on federal 
drug and gun charges.

Bennie Dean Herring was arrested on what the Coffee County, Ala., sheriff's 
department thought was a valid warrant from a neighboring county. It turned 
out that the warrant for Herring's arrest had been recalled five months 
earlier.

Herring argued that police negligence should automatically lead to the 
suppression of evidence found after an unjustified arrest.

But Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the court, said the evidence may 
be used ''when police mistakes are the result of negligence such as that 
described here, rather than systemic error or reckless disregard of 
constitutional requirements.''

Justices Samuel Alito, Anthony Kennedy, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas 
sided with Roberts.

In a dissent for the other four justices, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said 
the ruling ''leaves Herring, and others like him, with no remedy for 
violations of their constitutional rights.''

Ginsburg said accurate police record-keeping is of paramount importance, 
particularly with the widespread use of electronic databases. Justices 
Stephen Breyer, David Souter and John Paul Stevens also dissented.

Herring was arrested after a neighboring Dale County sheriff's employee found 
a computer entry noting that Herring was wanted for failing to appear in 
court on a felony charge. The sheriff's computer database had not been 
updated to reflect the recall of the warrant for Herring's arrest.

Meanwhile, in a search after Herring's arrest, Coffee County deputies found 
methamphetamine in Herring's pockets and an unloaded gun under the front seat 
of his truck.

Some courts have ruled that as a deterrent to police misconduct, the fruits 
of a similar search may be excluded from evidence.

But the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta said that suppressing 
evidence in Herring's case would be unlikely to deter sloppy record keeping.

The case is Herring v. U.S., 07-513. 

RecommendMore Articles in Washington »