=mewgirl;311427]jk: Why the search was illegal doesn't matter. It was illegal, and that will be easy to show in court. The only thing I need to know is whether or not it is considered legal to issue a warrant and arrest somebody based on the results of an illegal search.
whatever.



but if this is true:
I am quite sure that POLICE DEPARTMENT #2 had a warrant before they arrested me,
you have already lost since they would have arrested you and then they would have been able to search the car.

Since you have all the answers, why ask questions.

No arrest is "moot" based on probable cause.
what are you even talking about?

ALL arrests of any kind MUST have a warrant except in danger, and ALL searches of any kind MUST have either a warrant or consent, except in certain situations
should I even bother to argue this point as being wrong? It is.

My automobile was searched illegally and a warrant for an arrest by POLICE DEPARTMENT #2 was issued based on the results of the search.
the police do not issue warrants. Courts do. You said they already had the warrant anyway.

I am aware that all evidence obtained in an illegal search is illegal, however, I need to know if a warrant being issued based on proof which now exists but could not have existed if the illegal search had not been performed is valid.
again, not true, always and in your situation, I do not believe it would be true, based on your rendition of the story.

But hey, you already have all the answers so why do I bother?

So, to give you an answer to your actual question:

The only thing I need to know is whether or not it is considered legal to issue a warrant and arrest somebody based on the results of an illegal search.
Sometimes