ExpertLaw.com Forums

Why Don't Store Loss Prevention Officers Need Search Warrants

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page
Page 1 of 2 1 2 Next LastLast
  • 02-07-2015, 08:53 PM
    John_28
    Why Don't Store Loss Prevention Officers Need Search Warrants
    Quote:

    Quoting DeputyDog
    View Post

    Now - I'm glad you brought up that loss prevention are not the police. I have always loved it when I'm working in the LP role and someone says that. Why? Because they have no idea how true that is! Working in LP, I don't have to read you your miranda rights, and anything you tell me is admissible in court. I can continue to question you even after you request an attorney, and again, anything you tell me is admissible in court. And in any search I make of you or your things, whatever I find has no hope of being suppressed, since I'm not a cop and therefore not an agent of the state.

    If you have the power to detain people for the police, then you are an agent of the state. And you definitely need to have a warrant to conduct a search.
  • 02-07-2015, 08:56 PM
    cdwjava
    Re: Refusal to Cooperate With Loss Prevention After a Shoplifting Accusation
    Quote:

    Quoting John_28
    View Post
    If you have the power to detain people for the police, then you are an agent of the state. And you definitely need to have a warrant to conduct a search.

    Unless done so at the direction of the state (i.e. an officer is telling the person to do it), this is not true. While there may be a state or two that holds private citizens to this standard, that is not the case in most states.

    LP does not need a search warrant to search a person or their property, and if they detain people they are not acting as agents of the state - they hold their own liability as specified in the statutes if they use excessive force to affect the detention or arrest, or make an unlawful detention or arrest.
  • 02-07-2015, 08:59 PM
    John_28
    Why Don't Store Loss Prevention Officers Need Search Warrants
    Quote:

    Quoting cdwjava
    View Post
    LP does not need a search warrant to search a person or their property.


    Which court ruling states this?


    So, when I worked as a retail salesperson, I had the authority to search any woman's purse at will?
  • 02-07-2015, 09:04 PM
    cdwjava
    Re: Refusal to Cooperate With Loss Prevention After a Shoplifting Accusation
    Quote:

    Quoting John_28
    View Post
    Which court ruling states this?


    So, when I worked as a retail salesperson, I had the authority to search any woman's purse at will?

    There might be consequences for an unlawful detention or arrest if you nab someone to search their bag or person without cause, but you are not an agent of the state nor are you able to even seek a search warrant.

    Laws vary by state in this area. To make a blanket statement that LP or other retail folks are "agents of the state" when they affect a detention or an arrest is simply NOT TRUE. Nor must they seek a search warrant to conduct a search since they are legally unable to do so.

    Here is a good discussion of how these laws apply in my state of CA:

    http://le.alcoda.org/publications/fi...CESEARCHES.pdf
  • 02-07-2015, 09:17 PM
    tonynewman
    Re: Refusal to Cooperate With Loss Prevention After a Shoplifting Accusation
    Quote:

    Quoting John_28
    View Post
    Which court ruling states this?


    So, when I worked as a retail salesperson, I had the authority to search any woman's purse at will?

    many stores (at least in Baltimore) would have signs posted at the entrance that stated all bags can be searched if they enter the store,, or something to that effect, though I never have seen anyone look through a persons bag for no reason, but the signs are there,, I suspect that gives them the right to search a persons bag
  • 02-07-2015, 09:23 PM
    John_28
    Re: Refusal to Cooperate With Loss Prevention After a Shoplifting Accusation
    Quote:

    Quoting cdwjava
    View Post
    There might be consequences for an unlawful detention or arrest if you nab someone to search their bag or person without cause, but you are not an agent of the state nor are you able to even seek a search warrant.


    The above link states that, even if a mall security guard conducts an unlawful search, the fruits of that unlawful search are admissible because that guard is not an agent of the police. Fine.

    But, if the guard is not an agent of the police, and he is conducting an unlawful search, I have the right to physically resist that search. And, knowing that the fruits of the illegal search will be admissible in court, I just might have an incentive to resist to the extent that I seriously injure that guard.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote:

    Quoting tonynewman
    View Post
    many stores (at least in Baltimore) would have signs posted at the entrance that stated all bags can be searched if they enter the store,, or something to that effect, though I never have seen anyone look through a persons bag for no reason, but the signs are there,, I suspect that gives them the right to search a persons bag

    I'm not sure that signs would make a search legal. If I post a sign saying that anyone who comes into my store will be punched, that doesn't mean that I can legally punch a person.
  • 02-07-2015, 09:41 PM
    Who'sThatGuy
    Re: Refusal to Cooperate With Loss Prevention After a Shoplifting Accusation
    Quote:

    Quoting John_28
    View Post
    T
    But, if the guard is not an agent of the police, and he is conducting an unlawful search, I have the right to physically resist that search. And, knowing that the fruits of the illegal search will be admissible in court, I just might have an incentive to resist to the extent that I seriously injure that guard.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Oh great, you have just made a simple shoplifting charge against you turn into a robbery charge.
  • 02-07-2015, 09:43 PM
    tonynewman
    Re: Refusal to Cooperate With Loss Prevention After a Shoplifting Accusation
    Quote:

    Quoting John_28
    View Post
    The above link states that, even if a mall security guard conducts an unlawful search, the fruits of that unlawful search are admissible because that guard is not an agent of the police. Fine.

    But, if the guard is not an agent of the police, and he is conducting an unlawful search, I have the right to physically resist that search. And, knowing that the fruits of the illegal search will be admissible in court, I just might have an incentive to resist to the extent that I seriously injure that guard.

    - - - Updated - - -



    I'm not sure that signs would make a search legal. If I post a sign saying that anyone who comes into my store will be punched, that doesn't mean that I can legally punch a person.

    not only do the stores in Baltimore have those signs that state they can search any bag that enters the store, but Maryland (Baltimore) is one of the few states that allow video cameras in the dressing room of stores. but only if there is a sign posted stating they are taping you.
  • 02-07-2015, 09:45 PM
    cdwjava
    Re: Refusal to Cooperate With Loss Prevention After a Shoplifting Accusation
    Quote:

    Quoting John_28
    View Post
    But, if the guard is not an agent of the police, and he is conducting an unlawful search, I have the right to physically resist that search. And, knowing that the fruits of the illegal search will be admissible in court, I just might have an incentive to resist to the extent that I seriously injure that guard.

    That depends on the circumstances and the state. If you are detained/arrested pursuant to state law for a crime committed in the presence of the person doing the detention, they may very well have the right to conduct a search of your person and possessions if for no other reason than their safety!

    Some states may have a law that specifically precludes a private person search, but, there is no specific statute that makes it a crime for a private person to snoop inside of another's personal property and there are laws that prevent you from battering others - especially if you have been detained or arrested under the law. Not to mention the fact that using force in the commission of a theft is something we call "robbery" (as mentioned by WhosThatGuy above) which is a violent and serious felony.
  • 02-07-2015, 11:58 PM
    John_28
    Re: Refusal to Cooperate With Loss Prevention After a Shoplifting Accusation
    Quote:

    Quoting cdwjava
    View Post
    Some states may have a law that specifically precludes a private person search, but, there is no specific statute that makes it a crime for a private person to snoop inside of another's personal property and there are laws that prevent you from battering others - especially if you have been detained or arrested under the law. Not to mention the fact that using force in the commission of a theft is something we call "robbery" (as mentioned by WhosThatGuy above) which is a violent and serious felony.


    A security guard can snoop into my bag only if the bag is just sitting there, out of my hands. But what if I am holding the bag and I am using force to prevent the guard from snooping into the bag?

    And how would a guard just snoop into my pockets? I can use force to stop him from doing that.
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page
Page 1 of 2 1 2 Next LastLast
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:17 AM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.4
Copyright © 2023 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
Copyright © 2004 - 2018 ExpertLaw.com, All Rights Reserved