Summary
The situation involves potential Fourth Amendment violations due to a general warrant, which lacked specificity and had an overly broad scope. Illinois law and the Fourth Amendment require warrants to be specific. You may have a strong case for challenging the warrant and suppressing evidence obtained unlawfully. Consulting a lawyer specializing in Fourth Amendment rights is advisable. You could potentially file a Section 1983 claim for civil rights violations. Consider reviewing relevant case law, such as Mapp v. Ohio and Riley v. California, to support your argument.Full Conversation
In this case, police obtained a search warrant for every electronic device in the home Daugherty shared with his parents. This warrant was based on a threat made on an internet message board without first establishing the post was made by Daugherty. After it became clear it was not Daugherty who made the threatening post, police handed off the devices to the FBI to conduct a search, despite having neither probable cause nor a valid warrant. Then, almost two years after this warrantless search uncovered suspected contraband, the FBI sought a second warrant that laundered the prior illegal acts of local police and the FBI by claiming that the contraband was found in plain view while executing a valid state warrant.
The situation you described involves multiple legal issues, including the validity of the search warrant, probable cause, and the use of evidence obtained through potentially illegal searches.
Key Points in Illinois Law:
- Fourth Amendment Protections: Protects against unreasonable searches and seizures.
- Exclusionary Rule: Evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment may be inadmissible in court.
- Plain View Doctrine: Allows officers to seize evidence without a warrant if it is clearly visible.
What's your primary concern or question about this situation?
They got a warrant for a threat against a school, with first establishing that the person who's name on the threat posted it. The warrant they obtained was a general warrant because it didn't specify what file or document on the electronic device they were wanting to seize. The charges were later dropped, and the warrant was quashed but instead of returning the devices, the police handed the devices over to the FBI to go through this search of the devices was done without a warrant.
It sounds like there are significant issues here regarding unlawful search and seizure. Here are some key points to consider:
- Fourth Amendment Protections: The Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable searches and seizures.
- Exclusionary Rule: Evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment may be inadmissible in court.
- General Warrants: These are typically prohibited as they do not specify the particular place to be searched or items to be seized.
- Handing Over to FBI: This raises further constitutional questions, especially if done without a warrant.
What's your primary concern or question about this situation?
what the odds of the person winning the case
The odds of winning could be strong based on the information provided. Key issues include the validity of the search warrant, the scope of the search, and the potential inadmissibility of evidence obtained unlawfully. Consulting with a lawyer specializing in Fourth Amendment rights would be advisable.
Would you like more details on any specific legal point or guidance on how to proceed?
can you cite court cases for reference
Here are some relevant court cases that deal with Fourth Amendment rights and unlawful search and seizure:
- Mapp v. Ohio (*): Established the Exclusionary Rule, which states that evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment cannot be used in state courts.
- Katz v. United States (*): Expanded Fourth Amendment protections to cover electronic eavesdropping and wiretapping.
- Riley v. California (*): Held that police generally need a warrant to search digital information on a cell phone seized from an individual who has been arrested.
- Illinois v. Gates (*): Established the "totality of circumstances" approach for determining probable cause based on informants' tips.
- Arizona v. Evans (*): Held that evidence obtained from searches conducted in good faith based on computer errors is admissible.
These cases should provide a solid foundation for understanding the legal landscape related to your issue. Would you like more details on any of these cases, or do you have another question?
would this be considered a general warrant and why TO BE SEIZED:
Any and all computers, as defined in * ILCS */16D-*; any and all magnetic or optical media, including but not limited to hard disk drives, floppy disks, compact discs, DVDs, USB devices, and any and all passwords or other computer security devices, and any and all information and data stored in the form of magnetic or electronic coding on computer media or on media capable of being read by a computer or with the aid of computer equipment, any and all computer software,
Based on the information provided, the warrant described could be considered a general warrant. Here’s why:
- Lack of Specificity: It does not specify particular files or documents to be seized.
- Broad Scope: It allows the seizure of "any and all" computers, media, and data, which is overly broad.
- Illinois Law: Illinois law (* ILCS */16D-*) and the Fourth Amendment require specificity to avoid general warrants.
Would you like more details on any specific legal points or guidance on how to proceed?
any and all evidence, data or information pertaining to the possession including but not limited to: any and all evidence of dominion and control over the computer, specifically, but not limited to, a computer possessing MAC address "EC:4F:*:*:B4:*" or IP address "*.*.*.*"; peer to peer file trading software; any and all information pertaining to dates and times of access to the computer; any and all information pertaining to internet searches pertaining to posts regarding threats of violence directed towards schools or public officials; records and other items which evidence ownership or use of computer equipment found in the above residence; including but not limited to sales receipts, bills for internet access and handwritten notes, records evidencing occupancy or ownership of the premises described above including but not limited to utility and telephone bills, mail envelopes or address correspondence.
Why This Could Be Considered a General Warrant:
- Lack of Specificity: The warrant does not specify particular files or documents to be seized.
- Overly Broad Scope: It permits the seizure of "any and all" computers, media, and data, which is excessively broad.
- Illinois Law (* ILCS */16D-*): Both Illinois law and the Fourth Amendment require warrants to be specific to avoid being classified as general warrants.
Would you like more details on challenging a general warrant or guidance on next steps?
yeah
Why This Could Be Considered a General Warrant:
- Lack of Specificity: The warrant does not specify particular files or documents to be seized.
- Overly Broad Scope: It permits the seizure of "any and all" computers, media, and data, which is excessively broad.
- Illinois Law (* ILCS */16D-*): Both Illinois law and the Fourth Amendment require warrants to be specific to avoid being classified as general warrants.
Would you like guidance on challenging this warrant or more details on specific legal points?
guidance on next steps
Based on the information, you may have a strong case for challenging the warrant. Here are the next steps:
- Consult a Lawyer: Seek a lawyer specializing in Fourth Amendment rights.
- File a Motion to Suppress: Argue that the evidence obtained should be inadmissible due to the general warrant.
- Review Case Law: Use the cited cases (e.g., *Mapp v. Ohio*, *Riley v. California*) to support your argument.
Would you like more information on finding a lawyer or details on filing a motion to suppress?
no
It seems like you have a strong case for challenging the warrant based on Fourth Amendment issues. If you need more information on finding a lawyer or any other legal guidance, feel free to ask!
can I sue them for the genral warrant
Yes, you can potentially sue for the general warrant. Here's what you need to consider:
- Fourth Amendment Violations: If your Fourth Amendment rights were violated, you might have grounds for a lawsuit.
- Section * Claims: Under * U.S.C. § *, you can sue state actors for civil rights violations, including unlawful search and seizure.
Would you like more details on how to file a Section * claim?
can I sue them for the general warrant?
You may have grounds for a lawsuit based on the general warrant. Here are key points:
- Fourth Amendment: Protects against unreasonable searches and seizures.
- Exclusionary Rule: Evidence obtained illegally may be inadmissible.
- Civil Rights Violations: Under * U.S.C. § *, you could sue for constitutional violations.
Would you like more details on filing a civil rights lawsuit?
TRY ME!
Start a new chat