ExpertLaw.com Forums

Unreasonable Search and Seizure

Printable View

  • 04-21-2009, 06:10 PM
    DTKIND
    Unreasonable Search and Seizure
    My question involves search and seizure law in the State of: MN.

    WITH ALL HONESTY MY LAST CONVICTION WAS IN 1995 NO FELONY DRUG CONVICTION NOR VIOLENT FELONIES. HOWEVER 14 YEARS LATER I STILL GET HARASSED BY LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS. OVER THE 14 YEARS I OBTAINED 2 DEGREES (ONLY ASSOCIATES) OWN MY OWN HOUSE IN THE BERBS AND OWN 2 RETAIL STORES.

    PROBLEM: THE POLICE RAIDED MY STORE AND MY HOME AT THE SAME TIME USING THE SAME WORDING FOR ALL 3 AFFIDAVITS TO GET THE SEARCH WARRANTS. THE DETECTIVE CLAIMED THAT HE HAS A CI (RELIABLE CONFIDENTIAL INFORMANT) THAT WITNESSED ME WITH KILOS OF COCAINE AND A KILO PRESS WITHIN MY STORE & PAST CRIMINAL RECORD.

    IN SHORT NO DRUGS WERE FOUND AT ANY LOCATION NOT EVEN A ZIP LOCK BAG. NOR ANYTHING DRUG RELATED. SCALES, PRESSES ETC... HOWEVER A FIREARM WAS RECOVERED AND I WAS CHARGED FOR IT DUE TO BEING A FELON.

    CONSEQUENTLY MY STORES WERE COMPLETELY DESTROYED! WHEN THEY DID THE SEARCH THEY SNATCHED MY ALARMS OFF THE WALL, DESTROYED MY MERCHANDISE TO THE POINT I COULD NOT SELL IT. THE STORES LOOKED LIKED A TRASH HEAP. LITERALLY!!!! FURTHERMORE AFTER I POSTED BAIL THEY WOULD JUST SIT IN FRONT OF MY STORES KNOCKING ON MY STORE DOORS (I HAD THE DOORS LOCKED TO CLEAN UP THE MESS).

    THIS WENT ON EVEN AFTER I OPEN THE STORES AND TRIED TO SELL THE ITEMS THE WOULD POST UP AND HARASS MY PATRONS. CONSEQUENTLY I HAD TO GO OUT OF BUSINESS (BOTH STORES)

    THE OUTCOME OF THE CRIMINAL MATTER WAS DISMISSED DUE TO FACT OF PROBABLE CAUSE. MORE IMPORTANTLY THE JUDGE GAVE THE OFFICERS AND THE PROSECUTOR A VERBAL LASHING " I FIRST MAKE THE OBSERVATION THAT, IN GENERAL, THIS AFFIDAVIT IS SERIOUSLY DEFICIENT IN MANY RESPECTS, INCLUDING THE LACK OF SPECIFICITY AND PARTICULARLY AND ASSERTIONS BASED ON CONCLUSORY ALLEGATIONS AND ASSUMPTIONS AND INNUENDO, RATHER THAN BASED ON FACT. IT'S ALSO -- JUST IN PASSING, I WOULD NOTE IT IS POORLY DRAFTED, INCOMPREHENSIBLE IN PLACES AND REPLETE WITH MISSPELLINGS AND OTHER ERRORS. WHILE I'M VERY CAUTIOUS BEFORE OVERRULING A FELLOW JUDGE, OUR PRACTICE DOES NOT PERMIT A DEFENDANT CHARGED WITH CRIMES BASED ON SARCH WARRANTS TO SEEK FURTHER REVIEW OF THE WARRANT AND, THIS IS ESSENTIALLY A SUBSEQUENT REVIEW OF WHETHER THE FIRST JUDGE ACTUALLY HAD PROBABLE CAUSE TO ISSUE THE WARRANTS BASD ON THE AFFIDAVITS. AND, UPON MY INDEPENDENT REVIEW, I FIND THAT THE WARRANT AFFIDAVIT IS DEFICIENT IN THE PARTICULARS THAT I'VE JUST DESCRIBED AND THAT INSOFAR AS THE AFFIDAVIT WAS USED TO SUPPORT WARRANTS FOR THE SEARCH..... IT IS LEGALY INSUFFICIENT." CASE DISMISSED!




    I SPENT MY LIFE SAVINGS ON MY STORES, THEN ALL THE PROFIT THAT I CLOSELY ACCUMULATED FROM THE STORES WAS SPENT ON THE CASE. MY STORES ARE CLOSED MY MONEY GONE BUT I HAVE MY FREEDOM :D

    BUT IS THERE ANYTHING I CAN DO ABOUT THIS. MY CRIMINAL ATTORNEY SUGGESTED I CONTACT A CIVIL ATTORNEY. EVERY SINGLE CIVIL ATTORNEY I CONTACT WILL NOT TOUCH IT BECAUSE IT IS NOT A PERSONAL INJURY I AM NOT ACTUALLY INJURED. JUST PROPERTY LOSS. (AND EMOTIONALLY DISTRAUGHT AND DEPRESSED)

    I CONSIDERED LITIGATING MY OWN 1983 BUT I AM SERIOUSLY CONCERNED ABOUT QUALIFIED AND OFFICIAL IMMUNITY. I KNOW ITS A 4TH AMEND. VIOLATION. DESPITE THE FACT THEY DID HAVE THE RIGHT TO SEARCH MY PROPERTY BUT NOT TO DESTROY MY PROPERTY. SO I AM THINKING UNREASONABLE SEARCH.

    I AM AWARE THAT THE COMPLAINT CAUSE OF ACTION HAVE TO BE WORDED CORRECTLY BECAUSE I CAN LOSE REAL QUICK ON A SUMMARY JUDGEMENT.

    LOSING MY AMERICAN DREAM AND FAITH:wallbang:
    PLEASE HELP
  • 04-21-2009, 06:15 PM
    jk
    Re: Unreasonable Search and Seizure
    Quote:

    BUT IS THERE ANYTHING I CAN DO ABOUT THIS.
    Ya, you can reformat your post to get rid of the caps. It makes things hard to read and in internet etiquette, it is considered to be yelling.
  • 04-21-2009, 08:00 PM
    DTKIND
    Re: Unreasonable Search and Seizure
    Thank you I will kep that in mind. Would reformat that thread or double post but its against the rules. thanks again

    kind

    My question involves search and seizure law in the State of: MN.

    With all honesty my last conviction was in 1995 no felony drug conviction nor violent felonies. However 14 years later law enforcement officers still harass me. Over the 14 years I obtained 2 degrees (only associates) own my own house in the berbs and own 2 retail stores.

    Problem: the police raided my store and my home at the same time using the same wording for all 3 affidavits to get the search warrants. The detective claimed that he has a ci (reliable confidential informant) that witnessed me with kilos of cocaine and a kilo press within my store & past criminal record.

    In short no drugs were found at any location not even a zip lock bag. Nor anything drug related. Scales, presses etc... However a firearm was recovered and I was charged for it due to being a felon.

    Consequently my stores were completely destroyed! When they did the search they snatched my alarms off the wall, destroyed my merchandise to the point I could not sell it. The stores looked liked a trash heap. Literally!!!! Furthermore after I posted bail they would just sit in front of my stores knocking on my store doors (I had the doors locked to clean up the mess).

    This went on even after I open the stores and tried to sell the items the would post up and harass my patrons. Consequently I had to go out of business (both stores)

    the outcome of the criminal matter was dismissed due to fact of probable cause. More importantly the judge gave the officers and the prosecutor a verbal lashing " I first make the observation that, in general, this affidavit is seriously deficient in many respects, including the lack of specificity and particularly and assertions based on conclusory allegations and assumptions and innuendo, rather than based on fact. It's also -- just in passing, I would note it is poorly drafted, incomprehensible in places and replete with misspellings and other errors. While I’m very cautious before overruling a fellow judge, our practice does not permit a defendant charged with crimes based on search warrants to seek further review of the warrant and, this is essentially a subsequent review of whether the first judge actually had probable cause to issue the warrants based on the affidavits. And, upon my independent review, I find that the warrant affidavit is deficient in the particulars that I’ve just described and that insofar as the affidavit was used to support warrants for the search..... It is legally insufficient." case dismissed!




    I spent my life savings on my stores, and then all the profit that I closely accumulated from the stores was spent on the case. My stores are closed my money gone but I have my freedom

    but is there anything I can do about this. My criminal attorney suggested I contact a civil attorney. Every single civil attorney I contact will not touch it because it is not a personal injury I am not actually injured. Just property loss. (And emotionally distraught and depressed)

    I considered litigating my own 1983 but I am seriously concerned about qualified and official immunity. I know its a 4th amend. Violation. Despite the fact they did have the right to search my property but not to destroy my property. So I am thinking unreasonable search.

    I am aware that the complaint cause of action have to be worded correctly because I can lose real quick on a summary judgment.

    Losing my American dream and faith
    please help
  • 04-21-2009, 08:47 PM
    jk
    Re: Unreasonable Search and Seizure
    Quote:

    Quoting DTKIND
    View Post
    Every single civil attorney I contact will not touch it because it is not a personal injury I am not actually injured.

    actually, you are injured but not the type of injury they are speaking of. You must be speaking with personal injury attorneys. You need something more of an attorney that deals with civil rights violations. A very different animal.

    Quote:

    Despite the fact they did have the right to search my property but not to destroy my property.
    I would think your claim is that they did not have a right to search due to the defective warrant. Of course they do not have a right to destroy property either.

    Quote:

    So I am thinking unreasonable search.
    damaging your property is not what an "unreasonable search" refers to. It is referring to a 4th amendment right.

    you might even contact the ACLU. No guarantees but that is what they do.
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:50 AM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.4
Copyright © 2023 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
Copyright © 2004 - 2018 ExpertLaw.com, All Rights Reserved