-Caveat Lector-
Ruling Allows Cops To Seize Cars
By LAURIE ASSEO
.c The Associated Press
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Police do not need a warrant to seize someone's car from a
public place under laws requiring forfeiture of property linked to crime, the
Supreme Court said today.
The 7-2 ruling reinstated a Florida man's drug conviction based on the crack
cocaine police found in his car after seizing it without a warrant. Police
said the man's car was subject to forfeiture because it had been used to
deliver drugs several months earlier.
The case involves seizures made under a Florida law that allows forfeiture of
property used in committing drug crimes. A similar federal law provides for
forfeiture of vehicles used in transporting illegal drugs.
The ruling reversed a Florida Supreme Court decision that said the cocaine
should not have been used as evidence against Tyvessel Tyvorus White because
police did not get a warrant before seizing his car.
The state court based its ruling on the Constitution's Fourth Amendment
protection against unreasonable searches and seizures.
Justice Clarence Thomas wrote for the court today that the seizure of the car
did not violate the Fourth Amendment.
``Although ... the police lacked probable cause to believe that ... (White's)
car contained contraband ... they certainly had probable cause to believe
that the vehicle itself was contraband under Florida law,'' Thomas said.
Florida's lawyer, Carolyn Snurkowski, said, ``We're very happy'' with the
ruling. She said it may aid other governments with seizure laws, depending on
the details of those laws. For example, a new policy in New York City allows
police to seize the cars of people arrested for drunken driving.
White was arrested at work in Bay County, Fla., in 1993 on unrelated charges.
After he was taken into custody, police obtained the keys to his car and took
it from his workplace parking lot.
The seizure was based on the officers' belief that White's car had been used
several months earlier to deliver illegal drugs. Police searched White's car
and found two pieces of crack cocaine in the ashtray.
White was charged with possessing an illegal drug, and a state judge allowed
the cocaine to be used as evidence. White was convicted and a state appeals
court upheld the conviction.
However, the Florida Supreme Court threw out White's conviction, saying the
cocaine should not have been used as evidence because police did not get a
warrant before seizing the car.
Getting a warrant would have created no ``undue burden'' for the police once
White was arrested and his car remained at his workplace, the Florida court
said.
Justice Department lawyers supported the state's appeal to the Supreme Court,
saying different standards apply to seizures of property as opposed to
searches conducted without a warrant.
The seizure of White's car without a warrant was valid so long as police had
reason to believe it was used in a drug crime, government lawyers said. Once
a car is seized, it can be searched without a warrant, they added.
The Supreme Court ruled for the state.
Because the police seized the car from a public place -- the parking lot of
White's employer -- the seizure did not invade White's privacy, Thomas said.
His opinion was joined by Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and Justices
Sandra Day O'Connor, Antonin Scalia, Anthony M. Kennedy, David H. Souter and
Stephen G. Breyer.
Justices John Paul Stevens and Ruth Bader Ginsburg dissented. Writing for the
two, Stevens noted that the alleged use of the car to deliver drugs occurred
more than two months before police seized the vehicle.
Stevens said it appeared the officers simply wanted to avoid the ``hassle''
of getting a warrant. He added, ``I would not permit bare convenience to
overcome our established preference for the warrant process.''
The case is Florida vs. White, 98-223.
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing! These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
