I am not on probation or parolle. Can police barge through my door with guns drawn without even knocking and search my bedroom and bring me downstairs while they search? Also, should the search warrant be in my discovery? I still have not seen one and its not in my discovery.

Hello janice:

The answer to your first question, is yes, IF they had a warrant - which they apparently did because you thought it should be in your discovery. I suppose it SHOULD be in there, but if you're representing yourself, and you wrote the discovery motion yourself, then you may not have written it right... If you HAVE a lawyer, he's the one you should be asking these questions to.

Beyond that, the cops SHOULD have left a copy of the search warrant THERE in the house, assuming they arrested you. Plus, it's the AFFIDAVIT that spawned the search warrant that you want to see. THAT has all the relevant information you need... Was THAT in your discovery? Did you ASK for it?

excon

PS> (edited) You say "tampering", as though they're SCREWING you around, when in fact you HOPE they are telling you the TRUTH that there ISN'T a search warrant, and never was.

You said you have not seen it. Who provided you with copies of your discovery? Your attorney perhaps?

My public defender provided me with a redacted copy of my discovery, but this discovery has been edited by the police department. The actual two controlled buys buy a confidential informant were blank pages but had one sentence stating that I sold to a C.I. on 2 dates. Shouldn't there be details of the sale since they say they had search warrant. I thought the name of the person should be redacted out of the discovery not edit the whole damn page. Also there is a page missing out of my discovery as the numbers are crossed out on the bottom and rewritten in after page 21. Shouldn't I be entitled to all of it since they want to put me in prison for 6-9 years for this.

Hello again, j:

You keep complaining about how you're being treated by the police, when you should be HAPPY they're screwing up their case against you...

In the first place, the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution says that you MUST "be confronted with the witnesses against you". That means the redact is ILLEGAL. Secondarily, the missing page should give your lawyer another reason to challenge the search.

excon

I will disagree, the warrant is not part of discovery, unless you named it and wanted to see it. Discovery requires them to provide to you, evidence they will use in trial. So unless part of your defense is going to be illegal search, they don't have to address the search warrant.

Next unless the controlled buys are going to be used in court as part of the charges, they are only used to get the warrant.

If all they are going to use is the actual search of the house for evidence, then the earlier buys will not be addressed in court either.

This is how it works, they do controlled buys, they then use that on a search warrant application. Since it uses a CI and there is little put on a search warrant application, They only put what little is required to get a judge to sign it.

Also of course, if you want to use the search warrant and the search warrant application in court, you will list that as part of your defense and you will have to ask for that info specificly, it is not given in discovery of evidence, unless listed, since it is not used in court

Hello again, j:

I'm not sure if I agree or disagree with my friend, the Padre... What seems obvious to me here, is that your ONLY defense is to challenge the search. If the search is ultimately determined to be legal, then the evidence is IN, and you're TOAST...

Now, I don't disagree that the cops will put the words "confidential informant" in the space where the affiant is supposed to sign his name. The cops DON'T want to expose him for obvious reasons... However, I was not mistaken when I suggested the Constitution guarantees you the right to CONFRONT your accusers, and THAT'S the guy who said he bought drugs from you. Therefore, he MUST be named.

Your attorney needs to move for a suppression hearing, where the legality of the warrant will be questioned. If, at that hearing, the cops don't produce their CI, the judge SHOULD rule that the search was illegal, and NONE of the evidence seized can be used against you.

I say SHOULD because not all judges agree with me... Plus, I doubt your public defender would even consider filing for a suppression hearing, because that's not usually what they do.

Oh, it's what I would DEMAND that my attorney does, but that's how I would manage my defense. Others defendants might be too intimidated to do that... I hope you're not one of them.

excon