Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    185

    Default 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?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    185

    Default 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.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    California
    Posts
    20,594

    Default 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.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    California
    Posts
    20,594

    Default 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

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    185

    Default 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.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    3,666

    Default 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.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    not in a prison
    Posts
    732

    Default 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.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    California
    Posts
    20,594

    Default 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.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    185

    Default 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.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    California
    Posts
    20,594

    Default Re: Refusal to Cooperate With Loss Prevention After a Shoplifting Accusation

    Quote Quoting John_28
    View Post
    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?
    If you use force, you could be charged with battery. If you use force to conceal stolen goods, it's robbery.

    And how would a guard just snoop into my pockets? I can use force to stop him from doing that.
    And if you did, you could also be charged with crimes under applicable state including - as I mentioned - battery and/or robbery, depending on the facts.

    Most (perhaps ALL) states permit the reasonable use of force to safely detain people. Part of this detention can include - at a minimum - a search for weapons. If you resist, they may be permitted to use reasonable force to overcome that resistance.

    Again, it all depends on applicable state law and there are 50 of them plus the District of Columbia, so your mileage may vary as to the specifics. But, you have no sacred right to be secure in your pockets and pocketbook when it comes to a search or an arrest even by a private individual. The concept of reasonableness generally applies.

    1. Sponsored Links
       

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Civil Rights Issues: Can You Sue a Store for Discrimination for Having Loss Prevention Follow You
    By Helpmewithlaw in forum Civil Rights
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 12-07-2014, 07:50 AM
  2. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 08-08-2014, 08:14 AM
  3. Retail Fraud / Shoplifting: Can Loss Prevention Follow You After You Leave the Store
    By amandalcanfield in forum Criminal Charges
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 07-09-2012, 01:24 PM
  4. Retail Fraud / Shoplifting: Stopped by Loss Prevention Outside Store, but Did Not Respond
    By ditchinzimbabwe in forum Criminal Charges
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 07-08-2012, 10:59 PM
  5. Retail Fraud / Shoplifting: Voice Recordings by Loss Prevention Officers
    By theabhishek in forum Criminal Charges
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-19-2006, 10:36 AM
 
 
Sponsored Links

Legal Help, Information and Resources