-
665 So. 2d 1237 Louisiana Court of Appeal December 6, 1995 No. 27522-KA
Simultaneously or after the first strike at the door, the officers began to announce their presence by yelling "Police, Search Warrant."
Officer Price was in the rear of the building and he was able to hear the officers state "Police, search warrant."
to secure a search warrant.
-
639 So. 2d 1239 Louisiana Court of Appeal June 30, 1994 No. 93-K-2360
In Tatum , the Court held that police officers, who have probable cause to believe that a car they have lawfully stopped contains contraband, may conduct as thorough a warrantless search as a magistrate could authorize.
search without a warrant.
An immediate warrantless search is therefore constitutionally permissible when "the car is movable, the occupants are alerted, and the car's contents may never be found again if a warrant must be obtained." State v.
-
727 So. 2d 630 Louisiana Court of Appeal December 29, 1998 No. 97-KA-1115
In its pretrial writ ruling on the suppression, this court concluded that the police officers legally seized the cocaine without a warrant during a valid search incident to defendant's arrest, and under the automobile exception to
The issue left to be resolved is whether the deputies' subsequent search of the car without a warrant and the ensuing seizure of the cocaine were legal.
Belton, supra , for the proposition that "the police may search the passenger compartment of a car and any containers therein even though the occupant has been removed, so long as the former occupant was lawfully arrested and has been
-
535 So. 2d 1024 Louisiana Court of Appeal October 26, 1988 No. 19977-KA
In this case, because the search of the vehicle was conducted without a warrant, the burden of proof was upon the state to affirmatively show that the search and seizure was justified under an exception to the warrant requirements
to a magistrate and on the other hand carrying out an immediate search without a warrant.
An immediate warrantless search is therefore constitutionally permissible when "the car is movable, the occupants are alerted, and the car's contents may never be found again if a warrant must be obtained." [Citations omitted].
-
483 So. 2d 1278 Louisiana Court of Appeal February 14, 1986 No. KA-2635
Defendants argue that the search warrant upon which the search was based was invalid because it was based upon hearsay testimony. Secondly, defendants claim that the gun was the fruit of an illegal search.
Defendants argue that the police officer's lifting of the hood in an attempt to find the correct Vehicle Identification Number of the automobile amounted to an illegal intrusion, i.e. search, and that the subsequent search warrant
When evidence seized is in an officer's plain view, a search warrant is not required. State v. Hernandez, 410 So.2d 1381 (La.1982).
-
22 So. 3d 1150 Louisiana Court of Appeal November 4, 2009 No. 09-235
The admissibility of evidence seized without a warrant is a question for the trial court.
One exception to the warrant requirement is when there is probable cause to search an automobile.
This exception “rests in part on the premise that if the officers may seize a vehicle and immobilize it for however long it takes to secure a warrant they may conduct an immediate search.” Chambers v.
-
557 So. 2d 1030 Louisiana Court of Appeal February 15, 1990 No. 88-KA-1905
About forty-five minutes later, Officer Prosper observed Jonathan Johnson approach the red car. As he reached it, Officer Prosper approached him and asked him what he was doing and why his car was there.
As the officers got back in their police car and started to pull off they saw the suspect. He was asked to identify himself, and replied that he was waiting for his brother.
a warrant."
-
703 So. 2d 1325 Louisiana Court of Appeal November 12, 1997 No. 97-KA-493
An immediate warrantless search is therefore constitutionally permissible when "the car is movable, the occupants are alerted, and the car's contents may never be found if a warrant must be obtained." [Citation omitted.]
Kaufman and Guidry then followed the car, without losing sight of it, until they effected the stop. Moreover, the cocaine was in plain view on the seat.
Accordingly," a defendant may contest the search and seizure of a third person's car, even if the defendant has no proprietary interest in it, if he has an expectation of privacy and is adversely affected by the search". State v.
-
729 So. 2d 132 Louisiana Court of Appeal March 3, 1999 No. 98-KA-0670
Nogess said that when police asked him if he lived in the motel room he said, "officer, you can search the car, you can search the room, you can search everything."
a search warrant.
On trial of a motion to suppress the evidence, the State has the burden of proving the admissibility of evidence seized without a warrant. La.C.Cr.P. art. 703.
-
721 So. 2d 964 Louisiana Court of Appeal October 28, 1998 No. CR98-617
The officers obtained the driver's consent to search the car and located a joint of marijuana during the search. While the police officers were arresting the driver of the brown car, another car drove up *966 to the school.
The admissibility of evidence seized without a warrant is a question for the trial court.
A form of "seizure" which is permitted without the need of a warrant or probable cause is an investigatory stop made pursuant to La.Code Crim.P. art. 215.1(A). Cf. Terry v.
-
735 So. 2d 62 Louisiana Court of Appeal March 30, 1999 No. 98-KA-1006
may seize it without a warrant.
The State has borne its burden of proving that the search was justified under one of the exceptions to the warrant requirement. State v.
A police officer, in explaining his own actions, may refer to statements made to him by other persons involved in the case.
-
752 So. 2d 911 Louisiana Court of Appeal September 22, 1999 No. 99-K-1585
The defendant refused permission to search the vehicle. The first officer told the defendant that he was free to leave but that the police would detain the car for the dog's sniff test. The dog alerted on the trunk of the car.
warrant once probable cause to conduct the search is clear."
For constitutional purposes, there is no difference between seizing and holding a car before presenting the probable cause issue to a magistrate and carrying out an immediate search without a warrant; given probable cause to search
-
614 So. 2d 97 Louisiana Court of Appeal January 20, 1993 No. 24451-KA
The record reveals that Daniels blurted out the remark without prompting from or questioning by the police. Accordingly, this portion of the assignment is without merit. The contraband seized from the car.
Officers searched the car to inventory its contents. They had neither Daniels' consent to search nor a search warrant.
When a car is impounded, standard police procedure in making a reasonable inventory search to preserve a car owner's property and protect the police against claims of lost or stolen property does not constitute an unreasonable search
-
791 So. 2d 149 Louisiana Court of Appeal June 27, 2001 No. 01-KA-49
With regards to the .22 pistol which was located in the duffle bag in the closet, police may search without a warrant pursuant to consent.
Deputy Burgess also denied that defendant was left in the patrol car without air conditioning.
Lastly, defendant asserts that the police had no basis to search his car. However, there was no vehicle search involved in this case. Thus, this assignment of error merits no consideration.
-
612 So. 2d 256 Louisiana Court of Appeal December 29, 1992 No. 92-K-2443
In Tatum , the Court held that police officers, who have probable cause to believe that a car they have lawfully stopped contains contraband, may conduct as thorough a warrantless search as a magistrate could authorize.
search without a warrant.
An immediate warrantless search is therefore constitutionally permissible when "the car is movable, the occupants are alerted, and the car's contents may never be found again if a warrant must be obtained." State v.
-
477 So. 2d 864 Louisiana Court of Appeal October 11, 1985 No. KA-0627
to police.
The court held that a "search of the passenger compartment of an automobile, limited to those areas in which a weapon may be placed or hidden, is permissible if the police officer possesses a reasonable belief based on specific and
They were not obliged to let him reenter the car without checking to see what he had placed under the seat considering the *866 real possibility that they might be in danger. Finally, we distinguish this case from State v.
-
530 So. 2d 1242 Louisiana Court of Appeal August 3, 1988 Nos. 88-K-0436, 88-K-0443 and 88-K-0445
Without requesting or receiving permission, they entered with Segura. Three other persons were present and told a search warrant was being obtained.
The cocaine and documents taken from Room 105 were seized pursuant to a search warrant which may issue only upon an affidavit establishing probable cause to the satisfaction of a neutral magistrate. La. Const. Art.
A search warrant should be tested in a common sense and realistic manner without technical requirements of elaborate specificity. Doubtful or marginal cases should be resolved with a preference for warrants. State v.
-
731 So. 2d 319 Louisiana Court of Appeal February 3, 1999 Nos. 97-KA-2774, 98-K1128, 98-KA-1129
When the police officers were executing the search warrant, she gave them the key.
The police may search the passenger compartment of a car and any containers therein even though the occupant has been removed as long as the former occupant was lawfully arrested and had been an occupant just prior to that arrest.
Turlich then filed for a search warrant.
-
654 So. 2d 868 Louisiana Court of Appeal April 26, 1995 No. 94-KA-2112
Supreme Court recognized a limited "plain feel" exception to the search warrant requirement, holding that police may seize non-threatening contraband detected by touch during a protective *872 pat-down search so long as the search
The Court stated: We have already held that police officers, at least under certain circumstances, may seize contraband detected during the lawful execution of a Terry search ...
seize it without a warrant.
-
850 So. 2d 1049 Louisiana Court of Appeal June 27, 2003 No. 02-KA-717
it contains contraband, the Fourth Amendment ... permits police to search the vehicle without more.'
is concealed within may conduct a search of the vehicle that is as thorough as a magistrate could require in a warrant.
For constitutional purposes, there is no difference between seizing and holding a car before presenting the probable cause issue to a magistrate and carrying out an immediate search without a warrant....Given probable cause to search
Showing the top 500 cases. Narrow your search or add filters to see more.