Resident Consent Exception For Search?

[GregS]

House Criminal Justice Standing Committee Meeting

Standing Committee Meeting

Criminal Justice, Rep. Kurt Heise, Chair

DATE: Tuesday, September 22, 2015

TIME: 9:00 AM

PLACE: Senate Appropriations, State Capitol Building, Lansing, MI

AGENDA:
HB 4787 (Rep. Price)    Crimes; other; coercing female to have an abortion against her will; prohibit, and provide penalties.

HB 4830 (Rep. Jenkins)  Criminal procedure; sentencing guidelines; sentencing guidelines for crime of coercing a female to have an abortion against her will; enact.

HB 4788 (Rep. Price)    Criminal procedure; sentencing guidelines; sentencing guidelines for crime of assault and battery of a pregnant individual; provide for.

HB 4321 (Rep. Lucido)   Criminal procedure; search and seizure; warrant requirement to search a premises; provide for resident consent exception.

OR ANY BUSINESS PROPERLY BEFORE THIS COMMITTEE

To view text of legislation go to:
 http://www.legislature.mi.gov/mileg.aspx?page=CommitteeBillRecord

Committee Clerk: Angie Lake
Phone: 517-373-5795
e-Mail: alake@house.mi.gov

Individuals needing special accommodations to participate in the meeting may contact the Chair's office.

Schedule changes or cancellations available at http://www.house.mi.gov/publiccommitteeschedule/

Notice posted: 9/17/2015

Inbox

x Criminal Justice Committee <hrep-crim@listserver.legislature.mi.gov>

12:53 PM (4 hours ago)

   

to HREP-CRIM

 

[t-pain]

the flower is this?

 

www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2015-2016/billintroduced/House/htm/2015-HIB-4321.htm

 

watch for substitutes.

[GregS]

Hmm. On its surface it supports the exclusionary rule, and makes inadmissible evidence gathered when any resident states an objection prior to a warrantless search. I have to wonder why it would even be necessary to enact this bill. Because the Fourth Amendment and exclusionary rule prohibit it already, why even bring it up? Are there unstated consequences to this that would somehow infringe on those rights? Is the bill intended as some kind of work around for law enforcement? Do they expect to use the exigent language as some clever by half way to screw us?

Edited September 19, 2015 by GregS

[+Malamute]

SUMMARY:

House Bill 4321 would add a new section to the Code of Criminal Procedure to specify that, except in exigent circumstances, a law enforcement officer could not search a residence without a valid search warrant if a resident expressly objects to the entry or search. This provision would apply even if another resident consents to the entry or search after the objecting resident is no longer physically present at the residence.

Evidence obtained in the search of a residence in violation of the bill would be inadmissible in any criminal action against a person who objected to the entry or search by which the evidence was improperly obtained.

"Exigent circumstances" would include, but not be limited to, a circumstance in which a resident who consents to an entry or search under the bill's provisions is the victim of an alleged criminal act committed by a resident who objects to the search in which evidence is obtained.

MCL 760.25c, proposed