Quote:
Originally Posted by NORMAL550GIRL
Sheepdog, wouldn't there be a situation where there is probable cause for a warrant, but not for an arrest?
So in the case of TR's meth lab (example of a meth lab) -- you have it from good sources that there is a lab on the premises, but you have to search in order to get the proof before you can arrest.
And if you were to do a knock and announce situation, you run the risk of the persons fleeing, destroying the evidence or violence against the officers?
|
Absolutely there is. The meth lab scenario is a great example of a search warrant without an arrest. Many times, the search is conducted while the building is vacated; however, there are times when a warrant is obtained based on information received from sources that have been confirmed where the warrant is obtained regardless of obtaining consent from someone with the authority to give it. Subsequently, often times, the main suspects are developed after the search has been conducted.
However, I am assuming you are meaning when the lab is occupied by the suspects. In that case, a no knock would more than likely be sought. I think...I hope I am right... that the question here is in the validity of an officer entering a residence based on his "wanting" to without court approved authority where there is a clear-cut violation of the law. The case being used for this thread dealt with what some deemed exigent circumstances. Those tend to be the ones that usually end up in court for a decision. But yes, IMO, a meth lab that has been confirmed through multiple sources would be a good example of a no knock situation, IMO, however, those are even more dangerous due to the chemical equation that has to be factored into the operation.
Threaded Mode
