Other Criminal Procedure Case law affect on Probable Cause

[Under Armour]

Jurisdiction

Tennessee

What affect does prior case law have on current probable cause findings? I know there are man ifs, ands, or buts... In general, does binding case. Law chnage the standard for probable cause? For example:

-- Crossing the dotted lane divider is statutorily prohibited.

-- Jeremy operates a vehicle and tosses the dotted line on the interstate

-- A previous CCA opinion holds that in contrast to the statute, the law does not apply to interstate travel, and state does not appeal.

-- 2 years layers, Todd is stopped on the interstate for crossing the dotted lane divider.

-- A judicial magistrate, tasked with determining probable cause, refuses to find probable cause citing case law...

Is that a proper finding or is probable cause strictly based upon statutory law with case law being supporting to future argument?

 

[army judge]

is probable cause strictly based upon statutory law with case law being supporting to future argument?

Probable cause has NOTHING to do with a verdict issued by the trier(s) of the fact(s).

Probable cause relates to grounds a police officer uses in determining if an arrest is to be effected.

 

[Under Armour]

Probable cause has NOTHING to do with a verdict issued by the trier(s) of the fact(s).

Probable cause relates to grounds a police officer uses in determining if an arrest is to be effected.

I understand that... What I am asking is does case law have an affect on Probable cause? I'm talking at the warrant issuance stage... I said nothing about trial or conviction

 

[Zigner]

Did you have a specific legal matter that you are involved with that gives rise to this question?

 

[Tax Counsel]

Is that a proper finding or is probable cause strictly based upon statutory law with case law being supporting to future argument?

The Constitution requires probable cause for a search warrant, for an arrest and for the initiation of criminal prosecution. But the Constitution does not define the term probable cause. What constitutes probable cause is entirely set out in the case law (court decisions).

 

[Highwayman]

Probable cause is not necessary for a vehicle stop.

 

[flyingron]

We don't do homework. Your professor wanted you to reason out the possibilities (on both sides of the argument) rather than asking the internet to hand you answers. This is a THOUGHT task not a research one.

 

[Under Armour]

It's not a homework assignment... I will be starting law school in the fall though, hopefully.

What gives rise to the question is a conversation between myself and 3 friends whom are police officers.

They were discussing an issue with one of their judicial magistrates who refused to sign an arrest warrant citing a CCA opinion... I will lay the facts out specifically... Maybe that will help .

They responded to a call of a man firing a rifle in the air inside a large subdivision Investigation and evidence supported a felony Reckless Endangerment charge. The judicial magistrate refused to sign an arrest warrant based on a CCA option saying that there must be an identified victim placed in danger, rather than society as a whole.. Even though the Reckless Endangerment statute does not specially require a named victim .

 

[Tax Counsel]

They responded to a call of a man firing a rifle in the air inside a large subdivision Investigation and evidence supported a felony Reckless Endangerment charge. The judicial magistrate refused to sign an arrest warrant based on a CCA option saying that there must be an identified victim placed in danger, rather than society as a whole.. Even though the Reckless Endangerment statute does not specially require a named victim .

Then I have two observations. The first is that the magistrate's refusal to execute the warrant had nothing to do with whether there was probable cause. He was instead objecting to the validity of the law itself. Second, my guess is the judge either misunderstood the court case he read or the officers misunderstood the reason the magistrate judge gave for refusing to execute it because there is certainly no federal appeals court decision that says a criminal law may only punish acts that harm specific individuals.

 

[Zigner]

Then I have two observations. The first is that the magistrate's refusal to execute the warrant had nothing to do with whether there was probable cause. He was instead objecting to the validity of the law itself. Second, my guess is the judge either misunderstood the court case he read or the officers misunderstood the reason the magistrate judge gave for refusing to execute it because there is certainly no federal appeals court decision that says a criminal law may only punish acts that harm specific individuals.

A 3rd possibility - the OP misunderstands what he knows about the matter.

 

[mightymoose]

I see sovereign buzzwords. Usually they are separated by nonsense.

 

[Under Armour]

I see sovereign buzzwords. Usually they are separated by nonsense.

What would those "buzzwords" be? Lol you all are ready waaay too much into this...

Is it that hard to believe that I am simply trying to learn and find answers? It's not homework, I'm not involved in the case, I'm not a sovereign citizen hahaha, it's just a simple search for answers.

I know the magistrate and the officers.. I have worked for and with both.

 

[Under Armour]

Then I have two observations. The first is that the magistrate's refusal to execute the warrant had nothing to do with whether there was probable cause. He was instead objecting to the validity of the law itself. Second, my guess is the judge either misunderstood the court case he read or the officers misunderstood the reason the magistrate judge gave for refusing to execute it because there is certainly no federal appeals court decision that says a criminal law may only punish acts that harm specific individuals.

I have actually spoken to this magiatrate as he is an aquaintence of mine from a precious career.. His exact words were that he refused to sign because of the CCA case stating that Reckless Endangerment requires an identifiable victim... I can find that state ase if you would like.

Edit: TN v. Buford

http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCCA/2008/geanesa_DIS_112508.pdf

Says I have reached post limit of 5... So much for active discussion I guess.

 

[adjusterjack]

I can find that state ase if you would like.

Please do. Look it up on Google Scholar and post a link to it. Start here:

Google Scholar

 

[army judge]

His exact words were that he refused to sign because of the CCA case stating that Reckless Endangerment requires an identifiable victim.

A judge, magistrate,or other sitting judicial officer isn't required to provide an explanation should the jurist not wish to issue an arrest warrant.

Judges will often issue a search warrant if it can be shown that it's reasonably likely that the search will turn up contraband or evidence of a crime.

 

[flyingron]

I asked one of the local magistrates (who issues the warrants in my state) how often they turn down warrant requests. The answer was if they're completed properly, never. It almost never is the case that he believes the probable cause isn't there. Usually, it's merely a correctable procedural error in the application.

 

[army judge]

I asked one of the local magistrates (who issues the warrants in my state) how often they turn down warrant requests.

I am in the middle, insofar as rejecting such requests.

I reject about 15-20% of the warrant requests because the facts don't support a warrant being issued.

I suppose I'm a stickler to the letter of the law.

The answer was if they're completed properly, never. It almost never is the case that he believes the probable cause isn't there

That is normally my position.

Usually, it's merely a correctable procedural error in the application.

That does occur, too.

Some departments fare better than others, just as some people succeed in life where others fail.

 

[mightymoose]

I have never had one rejected, but I have always credited that to preparation.
I have had partners get warrants rejected for corrections, but I can't think of one that was rejected outright for probable cause.

 

[Tax Counsel]

I have actually spoken to this magiatrate as he is an aquaintence of mine from a precious career.. His exact words were that he refused to sign because of the CCA case stating that Reckless Endangerment requires an identifiable victim... I can find that state ase if you would like.

Ok, now I see what the issue is. The charge involved in the warrant application was apparently reckless endangerment. Under that statute it is required for conviction that the person "recklessly engages in conduct that places or may place another person in imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury." Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-103 (West).

In an application for an arrest warrant the police must provide to the court probable cause that the person to be arrested committed a crime. If the crime is reckless endangerment then the police need to show the judge at least something that would establish that the person sought committed that offense, including putting others in danger. If the judge is not convinced that the police at least had enough for probable cause, e.g. that they did not show that someone was in fact put imminent danger then the judge cannot execute the warrant.

While in most arrest warrant applications the police are able to show probable cause as it is not a high standard to meet, they do not always succeed because they don't present at least something to tie down the elements of the offense.