search attorney

frequently at the conclusion of an ordinarytraffic stop, police officers will ask the driver forpermission to search the vehicle. other times, officers may arrive at anapartment in response to a simple noise complaint, but before leaving, they askthe resident for permission to step inside and have a look around. in far too many cases, people will givepolice permission to search their residence, their car, or even their pocket or purse. clients will often tell me that they hadno idea how they were allowed to simply

decline a request to search by lawenforcement. the fourth amendment to the unitedstates constitution guarantees to each of us the right to be free from unlawfulsearch and seizures by law enforcement. in the absence of a search warrant,officers must have valid "probable cause" to search any given area orlocation. perhaps the most common exception to the 'probable cause'requirement is consent. if a person gives a police officerpermission to conduct a search, then no probable cause is necessary and theofficer may be proceeding on a pure hunch.

however, if a person politely but firmlydeclines an officers request for consent to search, the officer must be able toarticulate valid probable cause. this insures the greatest opportunityfor defense counsel to enter legal objections to the admissibility of anyitems of evidence that may be discovered. many of these otherwise valid legalobjections are simply waived, or lost in situations where a person knowinglyconsents to a police officer's request for permission to search. if you've been contacted by police forany reason and they are asking for your permission or consent to conduct asearch,

that request alone is a relatively goodindicator that the officer may very well lack independent probable cause tosupport a search. do yourself and your lawyer a favor. politely but firmly decline anyrequest by law enforcement for permission or consent. then the search must be premised uponvalid probable cause and your lawyer will have the greatest opportunity toargue against the admissibility of any evidence that the officer may haveunlawfully discovered.