Arrest, Search, Seizure, Warrant Recourse to remedy illegal search when no charge

[anonymouseuser]

Hi
My question is this. I am an adult who lives in the home of a parent, paying rent for a room. My room is private and my parent does not enter it. Furthermore, within my room is such things as a private lockbox which, even if my parent were to enter my private room, would certainly not be allowed into.

Recently the police came to my house and requested to search my room. I did not give consent. They then asked my parent for consent when she got home (I don't know what they said to her but she was not able to speak to me first), she provided it, and they searched both my private room and the areas (lockbox, closet, dresser drawers) which would be private even if the room were not.

Ultimately nothing was found in the search but I want to remedy this violation of my rights. As I understand it, a parent can not give consent to search an adult child's private areas, which would include the room if the parent is not permitted in there or the private places within the room (such as lockbox) if they were.

A. Am I correct to say that this search was clearly illegal as my rented room is private and my mother was not in a position to consent to a search?
B. What course of action do I have open if so? lawsuit, formal complaint?
C. Am I likely to find an attorney who would take the case?

 

[CdwJava]

A. Am I correct to say that this search was clearly illegal as my rented room is private and my mother was not in a position to consent to a search?

It would seem you are correct. However, there may be something else in play here that we are not aware of.

What state do you live in?

B. What course of action do I have open if so? lawsuit, formal complaint?

The typical remedy for a bad search is suppression of the evidence. As it is, there appears to be no evidence to suppress. So, you are left with complaint or a lawsuit. A complaint is easy because that simply requires that you go to the department and submit a complaint to the officers' superiors.

A lawsuit is difficult because you will have to pay a lot of money for an attorney and hope to prevail in a case where there are no actual damages. It's up to you whether you want to make that gamble. Many lawyers will offer free consultations. From my experience, I doubt you will get a lawyer to take this on contingency, and without actual damages, I just don't see this as going very far. What many attorneys will do will be (for a small fee) to send a threatening letter to the agency hoping for some "go away" money to settle the matter. If the agency calls the bluff, you will have a difficult decision to make. And, if you are living at home, you likely do not have the money to pay an attorney for a lawsuit.

Are you also planning to sue your mother?

How about moving out ... that way, this won't happen again.

C. Am I likely to find an attorney who would take the case?

Not likely. At least, not without money up front.

- Carl

 

[anonymouseuser]

I am in NY

No I am not planning on suing my mother - I don't see why I would as she was intimidated into consenting to a search.

As far as moving out, that is personal and for me to worry about. I will say however, for reasons of dignity, that "adult" only necessarily means I am 18 or over.

One follow up question:

By damages you mean strictly monetary? True there were none in that sense. I am not an expert on all of the many torts but take this hypothetical: various personal and potentially embarrassing items are removed from a lockbox and placed in plain view during the search. After the search is over my mother is asked by the police to enter my room to get me a jacket, as I was being detained and leaving with the police. She enters the room and inevitably sees the embarrassing items which were left in plain view by the police.

Would this qualify as a damage or otherwise give me good grounds for a suit?

 

[CdwJava]

No I am not planning on suing my mother - I don't see why I would as she was intimidated into consenting to a search.

Well, she's the one who apparently gave consent. And if she asserted to the police that she has control of the room, etc., then she has a shared blame in the matter. But, it's your choice ... though a court may wonder why you are leaving her out of any lawsuit.

As far as moving out, that is personal and for me to worry about. I will say however, for reasons of dignity, that "adult" only necessarily means I am 18 or over.

But being out of the home means that you do not have to worry about other folks granting permission for a search. Apparently the police have some interest in you ... I don't imagine it's because you are a choir boy. Unless, of course, their information is completely off base.

By damages you mean strictly monetary?

That's generally what lawsuits are for, yes.

True there were none in that sense. I am not an expert on all of the many torts but take this hypothetical: various personal and potentially embarrassing items are removed from a lockbox and placed in plain view during the search.

This is why you need to run it past an attorney. Some states have specified statutory penalties for certain types of violations. I am not from your state so I can't say whether yours does or not.

One key will be whether or not an attorney agrees to take it on contingency ... if he wants to be paid up front, that's a good sign that there's no moey in this and you did not hit the lottery.

Oh, and I will venture to guess that the police account will differ somewhat from yours so that will add a different twist to the whole affair.

After the search is over my mother is asked by the police to enter my room to get me a jacket, as I was being detained and leaving with the police. She enters the room and inevitably sees the embarrassing items which were left in plain view by the police.

You were "leaving" with the police? How's that? Were you arrested? If so, what was it for?

Unless you can cite some kind of articulable damage to your "embarrassment" I doubt it is going to be sufficient to convince an attorney to take the matter on contingency.

In simple form, you can sue anyone you want for anything you can think of ... winning is another matter. Whether you stand a chance of collecting an award will depend on a whole lot of facts that we do not have and that I doubt you will expound upon. So, my suggestion is that you shell out for a consultation (or find an attorney you can consult for free) and have him or her tell you whether you have any kind of a case worth pursuing. Even if there was wrongdoing on the part of the officers, the most you might be able to hope for could be that the officers get punished through a personnel complaint.

- Carl

 

[anonymouseuser]

Ok I assume you may have went to law school so you know what an assumption is and what relevance is. You bring in a lot of unfounded assumptions in your replies, and also ask about or posit things which are entirely irrelevant. I appreciate just remaining on topic and sticking to the facts, not worrying about what I am concerned about in the future or why they are interested in me.

Yes, I left with them against my will. No, I was not arrested. No, they had no reason to be interested in me. I can see your questions and confusions stem from an underlying misconception about the nature of police and policing which is way too far off topic for me to go into beyond suggesting you consider it yourself.

Nevertheless, thanks for the answers.

 

[CdwJava]

Ok I assume you may have went to law school so you know what an assumption is and what relevance is.

Since you have posted few facts, one is left with assumptions.

Yes, I left with them against my will. No, I was not arrested.

Out here we call that an arrest. If you were taken against your will, you were either arrested or kidnapped. Perhaps you should consider speaking to the FBI.

No, they had no reason to be interested in me. I can see your questions and confusions stem from an underlying misconception about the nature of police and policing which is way too far off topic for me to go into beyond suggesting you consider it yourself.

Of course it is ... darn those years of experience and degrees! They ain't what they used to be!

Like I said, speak to an attorney. That way you can give him or her all the relevant facts you are reluctant to provide here, and he or she can make an informed decision as to whether you have a case or not. If they say you have a case and want all the money up front, don't believe it. If they do cartwheels and agree to a contingency, then consider yourself fortunate.

- Carl

 

[anonymouseuser]

I love going back and forth:

Since you have posted few facts, one is left with assumptions.

I posted all the relevant facts, anything I left out is unnecessary

If you were taken against your will, you were either arrested or kidnapped.

There are other possibilities, you are just unable to think of them.

darn those years of experience and degrees! They ain't what they used to be!

Years of experience in particular are going to give you one perspective on the nature of policing. There are other perspectives and I am contending that your perspective gained as an officer has led to misconceptions on the role of police and policing, both historically and in our society.

Thanks for the help.

 

[CdwJava]

I love going back and forth:

I'm glad you do ... I find it annoying.

I posted all the relevant facts, anything I left out is unnecessary

Not true. Search and seizure law is most often evaluated on a "totality of the circumstances", and it is painfully obvious that all the details were not posted, nor would I expect you to post them. Hence the suggestion you speak to an attorney to whom you can provide all the relevant facts. If, when you speak with a local attorney. you maintain this attitude and limit the facts to what you THINK the attorney should know, I doubt you will be able to hire one even if grounds for any action exists.

There are other possibilities, you are just unable to think of them.

As to what? As to why they took you against your will? I can think of a couple ... perhaps an involuntary mental health commit? If so, that could justify a search of your room even without consent ... again, depending on the circumstances - circumstances which you seem to deem as unnecessary for a legal evaluation of the search.

But, that's your call.

Years of experience in particular are going to give you one perspective on the nature of policing. There are other perspectives and I am contending that your perspective gained as an officer has led to misconceptions on the role of police and policing, both historically and in our society.

I contend you are incorrect.

Oh, and my educational (and even career) background is in fields other than just law enforcement, so I have a much broader perspective than you might expect.

Good luck.

- Carl

 

[anonymouseuser]

I'm glad you do ... I find it annoying.

Maybe you should try to not let little things annoy you so much.

I contend you are incorrect.

Oh, and my educational (and even career) background is in fields other than just law enforcement, so I have a much broader perspective than you might expect.

Ok you can say you contend it but you didn't go on to actually contend anything, so saying you do is meaningless. What other perspectives have you been privy to? You've been engaged in social activism? Maybe a dissident political association? Are you a member of the superfluous part of the population, meaning (statistically) you are likely a minority also? I am interested to know where a cop ever found himself on the other side of state oppression. Or tell me more about your educational background. I assume you are referring to your extensive background in sociology where you've read Foucault, Durkheim, Weber, and Marx and that's where you've acquired these alternative perspectives on the historical function of policing in society? Or are you talking about the more recent technical studies on the efficacy of different policing models? Just interested to know.

Thanks for the help