Now The Fourth Amendment Under Attack

[Walter63a]

NDLawyer, while I respect your opinion as a legal professional, I still feel that this majority opinion is a big mistake, and a further errosion of our constitutional rights. Yes, this opinion, by the Fifth Circuit, is only binding, for now, in Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi. However, said opinion could, indeed, be used by other circuit courts throughout the U.S., for guidance!!! http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/ohmy.gif http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/sad.gif I must agree with the dissenting judges, in this case. I highly recomend that all of you focus on the dissenting opinion (pp.33-60). Just click on the link provided by NDLawyer. http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/blink.gif http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/unsure.gif Best Regards, Walter

[NDLawyer]

Walter:

 

I agree with you completely, I just wanted to point out some issue with the opinion. I take it very seriously whenever one of our constitutionally guaranteed civil rights is eroded either by any part of the governement.

 

I still stick with the bad facts make bad law conclusion:

 

1. An occupant of the residence gave police consent to enter, which is one of the exceptions to the 4th Amendment warrant requirement.

 

2. Mr. Gould was a known violent felon

 

3. The brilliant Mr. Gould had made recent threats to kill some local judges.

 

Do I agree with the conclusion of the majority? HELL NO. Can I see where their decision may be affirmed by the Supreme Court? Unfortunately, Yes, even though I would hate to see it happen, both as a private citizen and as one who sees violations of the Fourth and Fifth amendments on a daily basis.

 

Curious how a judge never believes an accused felon over the police unless you have a LOT of supporting evidence. Even then it is not unusual to have a judge overrule a motion to suppress and have to wait and hope an appellate court will set things straight.

 

 

[Arthur Fliegenheimer]

Maybe the renowned barrister Jim Sturdivant can argue the Constitutionality in front of the Supreme Court? Or maybe get the same lawyer who successfully sued a high school women's basketball coach 25 years after that coach asked his client to lose 10 lbs. She claimed she had suffered irreparable damage from the remark. Amazing that these ambulance chasers find jurors who would return a guilty verdict and OK a 3 million award.