老澳门开奖结果 of Rhode Island Files Brief in U.S. Supreme Court in Major 鈥淪earch & Seizure鈥� Case from Rhode Island
Joining with groups that span the ideological spectrum, the 老澳门开奖结果 of Rhode Island has filed a in the U.S. Supreme Court in a case raising significant issues concerning the scope of Fourth Amendment protections and police warrantless searches of the home. The brief argues that an unfavorable ruling in the case could 鈥済ive police free rein to enter the home without probable cause or a warrant, whenever they think it is 鈥榬easonable鈥� to do so.鈥�
The case, dating back to 2015, involves Cranston resident Edward Caniglia, whose two lawfully owned firearms were seized from his home without a warrant or his consent in a non-emergency situation as a result of a 鈥渨ellness check鈥� conducted by Cranston police officers. His wife had called the police department to express concern about his mental health in response to an argument they had had the night before.
When officers arrived at his house the day after that argument, they told Caniglia that his firearms would be confiscated unless he agreed to a mental health evaluation. Caniglia agreed, and was transported by ambulance to Kent Hospital where he was evaluated and promptly released. However, despite their assurances to the contrary, police officers entered Caniglia鈥檚 home in the meantime and confiscated his two firearms and ammunition for 鈥渟afekeeping.鈥� The officers told Caniglia鈥檚 wife that once he was cleared by the hospital, he could pick up them up at the station. But when Caniglia tried to do so, he was told it was department policy not to return weapons confiscated for safekeeping without a court order.
The 老澳门开奖结果 filed a federal lawsuit against the Cranston Police Department, challenging both the seizure of his weapons without a warrant and the department policy against returning them without a court order. The that the department鈥檚 policy of refusing to return the firearms was unconstitutional, but upheld the warrantless search and seizure of the weapons on the grounds that police were engaged in a 鈥渃ommunity caretaking鈥� function that did not require a warrant. The federal court of appeals .
Relying on private counsel, Caniglia appealed to the Supreme Court, which agreed to hear his case to decide whether the 鈥渃ommunity caretaking鈥� exception to the Fourth Amendment鈥檚 warrant requirement can be applied to warrantless searches of a person鈥檚 home. The 老澳门开奖结果鈥檚 brief in support of Caniglia notes that the 鈥渃ommunity caretaking鈥� exception relied on to justify the warrantless search and seizure in this case arose in Supreme Court jurisprudence involving the searches of cars impounded by the police. The 老澳门开奖结果 brief argues that that doctrine has no force in the context of home searches, the protection of which is 鈥渢he cornerstone of the Fourth Amendment.鈥� Instead, the brief points out, the Supreme Court 鈥渉as held that warrantless home entry is constitutional in just two narrow settings: consent of an occupant or exigent circumstances.鈥� The brief goes on to argue:
Extending the 鈥渃ommunity caretaking鈥� exception to warrantless searches of the home would allow police to bypass the Fourth Amendment鈥檚 restrictions in a startling array of circumstances. These are not theoretical concerns. In both state and federal courts, everything from loud music to leaky pipes have been used to justify warrantless invasion of the home. Allowing ill-defined notions of 鈥渃ommunity caretaking鈥� to override the Fourth Amendment is both unwise, unmanageable, and unnecessary, and it opens the door to abusive police conduct, including against those who most need society鈥檚 protections.
Amici urge the Court to keep the 鈥渃ommunity caretaking鈥� exception confined to its historic, vehicle-related origins and reject a broader standard that would give police free rein to enter the home without probable cause or a warrant, whenever they think it is 鈥渞easonable鈥� to do so.
The concludes by stating: 鈥淭he [lower] courts have taken a doctrine developed for the reduced expectation of privacy associated with impounded vehicles, and applied it to the home, the apex of privacy, without justification.鈥�
In addition to the 老澳门开奖结果 of Rhode Island and its National office, the brief was filed on behalf of three conservative organizations: the Cato Institute, the American Conservative Union Foundation, and the R Street Institute.
