http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...GE8D.DTL&tsp=1
I am completely confused by this article. . .
Quote:
|
The justices denied review of a California Supreme Court ruling in June that upheld the vehicle stops without requiring a warrant or evidence of lawbreaking.
|
Ok. . . So what the hell just happened to the Fourth Amendment here. . .
Quote:
|
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
|
They had probable cause. They witnessed a law being broken.
Quote:
|
The case comes from San Diego, where a warden patrolling a fishing pier through a telescope in August 2007 saw fisherman Bouhn Maikhio reeling in either a lobster or a fish and putting it in a black bag.
|
This should have just been thrown out of court. Now its a damn supreme court ruling. . .
- G