Police, The Fourth Amendment, Qualified Immunity

Overreaching drug laws at work

leave a comment »


These facts are taken from the complaint or documents integral to the complaint. On September 18, 2014, Salvador was at his home in the Bronx. The defendant police officers entered the plaintiff’s apartment pursuant to a warrant that allowed them to search for firearms.[1] After searching a bureau, the officers found some Oxycodone[2] pills in a plastic bag in the same drawer as the prescription bottle for those pills. The plaintiff contends that the pills were lawfully his and that they were in a plastic bag because the lid had fallen off of their proper container. . . .

. . .

The plaintiff is correct that the Oxycodone pills were outside the scope of the warrant, which permitted the officers to search for and seize firearms. The plaintiff does not argue, however, that the police officers exceeded the scope of the warrant when they opened the drawer of his bureau. On the facts alleged in the complaint, the pills were in a plastic bag in the drawer that the police lawfully opened to execute the search warrant. Thus, the plain view doctrine allows for their seizure because the officers were reasonable in determining that the pills were connected with criminal activity. As discussed in more detail below, the pills were in a plastic bag and were not in their proper container. This method of storing the pills itself violated the law.


Written by Burgers Allday

May 30, 2016 at 2:10 pm

Posted in Uncategorized

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: