Can cops raid a house party without permission to come inside.

hope this is in the right spot.

Last week my friend "Tom" had a get together with some people(10-15). me and my girlfriend stopped by to hangout and socialized with others for a bit.

By the end of the get together there where some "beverages" that had been consumed by some. My girlfriend and I DIDNT because we had plans for that night and where only stopping by for a short while.

Long story short, later on the police showed up and "let there selves right in the door". Of course there where people under the age of 21 who where arrested and given MIP's. My girlfriend and I where fine because we hadn't been drinking thank god.
NO ONE let them inside,they didn't ask. The owners son who was over 18 was there and didn't let them in.

No one even knew they showed up until it was to late.

My question is, do they have the right to barge their selves through the door without permission from the parents, son or even a search warrent?

I can't see how the can charge somone with a crime when they had no right to be in that house in the first place.
Should "Tom" get a lawyer along with the others that where charged?


Please don't turn this into a thread about how some of us broke the law,we all do it and know it was wrong.

i'm sure there are LEO's here that can help you out, but the only way (i know) they can legally enter and check things out is
1. they received a complaint /or tip (someone mentioned underage & drinking)
2. some one there let them in, doesn't really matter who
3. they observed suspicious activity at or in the residence (giving them probable cause) they can look through windows if possible and what ever they see can be used
4. (not that common but possible) your landlord or property manager gave them permission to check the property

No usually your 4th admendment prevents this.

Source
FOURTH AMENDMENT (1791)

The amendment that forbids searches without a warrant describing what is being sought and what could be seized sat on the books for years, lacking one important thing: a penalty for police and prosecutors who failed to follow it. It was not until 1914 when Fremont Weeks, a suspected bookie, was arrested at a train station in St. Louis and federal marshals let themselves into his home and carted off an array of papers, that the Supreme Court took up the question of what to do when the government ignores constitutional protection. In a landmark ruling, the court decided that the conviction could not stand and that the marshals had to return the documents to Weeks. It became known as the exclusionary rule. In 1949 the court extended the same rule to state law enforcement.

But police today it seems think they trump the constitution so you basically screwed...

This is my understanding of the law and it may very well vary from state to state etc.

An officer or officers can enter if they believe they had probable cause for some sort of illegal activity (i.e looking through a window or over a fence and seeing something they believe to be illegal; either illicit smoke or supposed underage drinking etc.

More often than not unfortunately they will claim they have seen these things when all really know is that theres a house party. It doesn't have to be going on, just the "appearance" of it. Thats how they get in.

Also, very very important. Especially if its a large party its almost impossible to keep all doors locked......ESPECIALLY outside entrances such as gates in a fence, patio doors etc. Thats usually how they get in because if you leave your premesis "open" then you are bascially inviting them in. If you chose to have a house party with the doors locked and the cutains drawn then you totally have a case because they cannot claim that they see anything and there is no way for them to enter without knocking or ringing the doorbell and at that point they totally need a warrant and stand your ground. Apologize for the noise etc and say you'll keep it down. They CANNOT come in at that point. If they claim they've seen something tell them that the curtains are drawn and that is impossible, please come back with a warrant.

As far as I know and as others have said if they have "Probable cause" they can enter, Probably cause can be anything from hearing a party going on and seeing young people in the house to the smell of drugs being used or more or less anything.

That is unless they are Vampire cops, then they have to be invited in

As far as i know, its a trick game they play. LEgaly, regardless, police cannot he sanctity of your home without a warrent. IF you or someone opens the door and they pass the door line, they have the right to be thier now, since theyve gained enternace. LEgaly, they are suposed to have a search warrent. IF they ask permission, or try to soft themeselves past you inside, its yuor job to block the door entrance ( be nice n polite) and say im sorry, but without a warrant, i cannot let you inside. thats how its supposed to work.
a judge must sign a paper.
but thats how the game isplayed* its tricky* the trick is to never yell or strictly or demandingly say NO for them to enter..be nice professional and polite. they must get a warrant to enter.

Good information you all have posted. I'm thinking it may have been the amount of cars in the driveway.
Wasn't any music,people weren't running around crazy making noise ect.
Just seems strange that a lot of cars would attract cops. Is it legal for them to walk up and peek through the windows?
I mean it is the homeowners LAWN/YARD.

Like you said, to bad it wasn't a nice polite vampire cop. They at least ask permission.

Yep. All they need is probable cause. I'm pretty sure there's a very long list of things to say are the reason for raiding a house party lol.

the way around it is, if you are a licensed LLC and you preadvertised your event. if they enter the premises without warrant or your personal invitation, they are liable and can be sued.

as long as you deny them entrance they are bound by federal law and must obey it. they must have warrant.

how they were busting people coming to our events was, they put up road blocks one mile up the road from the entrance. and asked people to declare they had drugs, and if they did, they would just receive a ticket and could continue to the festival. if they lied and the dogs found the drugs they were hauled off to jail.

unfortunately for them the supreme court found in favor of the patrons, because it was an undeniably clear case of entrapment and harassment

know the law and use it

I would check... But as I know the law.. They can NOT enter without permission unless they witness a FELONY.

I have asked my Uncle who is a LEO... He told me that a suspision of a misdemeanor is not enough to enter a private dwelling.

There are four main circumstances in which a warrant is not required for police to search your house:

1. Consent. If the person who is in control of the property consents to the search without being coerced or tricked into doing so, a search without a warrant is valid. Note that police do not have to tell you that you have the right to refuse a search, but you do. Also, note that if you have a roommate, he or she can consent to a search of the common areas of your dwelling (kitchen, living room), but not to your private areas (bedroom, for instance). On the other hand, the Supreme Court recently ruled that one spouse cannot consent to the search of a house on behalf of the other.

2. Plain View. If a police officer already has the right to be on your property and sees contraband or evidence of a crime that is clearly visible, that object may be lawfully seized and used as evidence. For example, if the police are in your house on a domestic violence call and see marijuana plants on the windowsill, the plants can be seized as evidence.

3. Search Incident to Arrest. If you are being arrested in your house, police officers may search for weapons or other accomplices to protect their safety (known as a "protective sweep"), or they may otherwise search to prevent the destruction of evidence.

4. Exigent Circumstances. This exception refers to emergency situations where the process of getting a valid search warrant could compromise public safety or could lead to a loss of evidence. This encompasses instances of "hot pursuit" in which a suspect is about to escape. A recent California Supreme Court decision ruled that police may enter a DUI suspect's home without a warrant on the basis of the theory that important evidence, namely the suspect's blood alcohol level, may be lost otherwise.
www.legalzoom.com...

Take note to #4
Otherwise, they need probable cause based on visual evidence.

Originally posted by xEphon
There are four main circumstances in which a warrant is not required for police to search your house:

1. Consent. If the person who is in control of the property consents to the search without being coerced or tricked into doing so, a search without a warrant is valid. Note that police do not have to tell you that you have the right to refuse a search, but you do. Also, note that if you have a roommate, he or she can consent to a search of the common areas of your dwelling (kitchen, living room), but not to your private areas (bedroom, for instance). On the other hand, the Supreme Court recently ruled that one spouse cannot consent to the search of a house on behalf of the other.

2. Plain View. If a police officer already has the right to be on your property and sees contraband or evidence of a crime that is clearly visible, that object may be lawfully seized and used as evidence. For example, if the police are in your house on a domestic violence call and see marijuana plants on the windowsill, the plants can be seized as evidence.

3. Search Incident to Arrest. If you are being arrested in your house, police officers may search for weapons or other accomplices to protect their safety (known as a "protective sweep"), or they may otherwise search to prevent the destruction of evidence.

4. Exigent Circumstances. This exception refers to emergency situations where the process of getting a valid search warrant could compromise public safety or could lead to a loss of evidence. This encompasses instances of "hot pursuit" in which a suspect is about to escape. A recent California Supreme Court decision ruled that police may enter a DUI suspect's home without a warrant on the basis of the theory that important evidence, namely the suspect's blood alcohol level, may be lost otherwise.
www.legalzoom.com...

Take note to #4
Otherwise, they need probable cause based on visual evidence.

Good post, it should clear everything up for the people who think they can be raping/murdering someone right next to their front door with the window open and get away with it because DUH COP CAN'T GO INSIDE MUH HOUSE CUZ I PROTACTED BY DA FOTHE AMANDMANT.

The key is that they have to believe someone insides life is in danger. It's spot on saying that the "suspicion" of misdemeanors going on inside property is NOT a valid reason to enter. Even if you have a person in your home with a warrant, that person can stand in the window, wave and laugh at the police outside and they can't do jack. I've personally seen it done.

They have to have permission to enter unless someone inside is believed to be in eminent danger. An unlocked door is not the same as inviting them inside. Neither is simply answering the door. Any cop assuming this has watched too many Hollywood productions. On a far stretch, I'd be curious to know if any person inside the home could grant them entry, or if it has to be legal of age resident of the home. It seems to me that it SHOULD be only residents over 18 allowed to legally grant them entry. Not saying that's how it is, but that's how it should be.

I'm assuming your older brother got popped with contributing to the delinquency of a minor. If that's the case, then I feel sorry for him. I'm sure there's probably a case for illegal search and seizure, but finding a judge sympathetic to underage drinking would be near impossible.

Originally posted by RestingInPieces
Good post, it should clear everything up for the people who think they can be raping/murdering someone right next to their front door with the window open and get away with it because DUH COP CAN'T GO INSIDE MUH HOUSE CUZ I PROTACTED BY DA FOTHE AMANDMANT.

That falls under the "suspicion of personal distress." Apples and oranges. You could be sitting there, smiling and waving, smoking a blunt and they do NOT have the right to come in and write you a ticket. That's called illegal search and seizure.

My understanding is at a private house party someone doesn't have to be 21 to enjoy a drink. The police were wrong to have entered the house, but face it we live in a police state. I know of people who have been arrested for having an open house party. Your friends can probably beat the charges but they will need to hire a lawyer. It may be cheaper in the short term to pay the fines and move on but in the long term having any sort of criminal history will hurt your chances in the future for high paying jobs, security clearances, ect..

Talk to a lawyer who has dealt and won with similar cases, and remember pleading no contest/ nolo contendere will still leave you with a record.

Thanks everyone for all the info that was great.

The people who were given MIP's are in the process of getting lawyers because their parents want to fight it.

i had the same thing happen to me awhile back. i had the door open but the screen as closed. they argued that if the door is open they had every right to come inside regardless if there was a screen door. i was pist. they said they had probable cause or something along them lines. everyone was of age so no charges. at the end of it all he wouldnt give me his badge number or his name.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

As far as I have been noticing, all they need is a badge, and a compelling story. Of course it doesn't hurt if they have corroborating tales to tell. The cops are not usually asked about who, what , where, or when, as long as someone at the get together got a ticket or arrested.

This is the way things are now, I figure its time to get used to it. Its unfortunate that this happened though. I wouldn't suggest a lawyer, because if at least ONE person got in trouble, thats all they need.

Peace, NRE.

I will support the "four rules" stated earlier. The person that posted those summed it up pretty well. Someone else also mentioned the bold audacity of most LEO's that think they run this place and can barge in anywhere. I think thats pretty accurate too.

There are a few things that one must keep in mind if ever you answer your door and find the police to be the ones aknocking.

Some nuances in regulations should be expected but what I will state should be held almost universally, as far as my knowledge is concerned.

When dealing with an "occupancy" (vehicle, home) there is a very wide open degree of visual interpretation that is afforded to LEO's, even when warrants are not in play. This is especially true when they are responding to a report or acting upon an instance of "probable cause".

If an LEO is just going about their business and you yours, they technically dont really have the right to pay special attention to you. If however, they are responding to a report OR they happen to "notice" some sort of "suspicious activity" a whole new realm of regulations opens up. With that said, I will get to the real message.

ANY TIME an LEO approaches you you have the right to demand a statement of probable cause. At any point before or after this (I suggest after) you have the right to ask if you are being detained. If you are not being detained you have the absolute right to leave. Now, some LEO's will resist your insistence of exercising your rights, but it should almost always hold up in court if well represented. Any LEO that is a decent employee of the people will be well aware of these rights.

Once an LEO expresses "probable cause" (and even before then) they are then essentially allowed to do a bit more. At this point if you are in your vehicle, home or any other occupancy they have a visual leeway that allows them to further push their "probable cause" on anything they can "see".

This part is very important. This visual allowance is very important to acknowledge, especially in situations at a house. If an LEO or Fed comes knocking at your door it is incredibly important that you immediately step outside and close the door behind you! By stepping outside and closing the door you are closing off the LEO's range of visual interpretation.

If you answer your door and leave it open while talking to an LEO they can see anything. Once the LEO "sees" something they have the right to investigate it. If that something is in your house, then the LEO now has the right to enter your house only into the room that they witnessed the probable cause in.

If the LEO's are serving a warrant be sure to read the warrant. It will have the exact locations to be searched specified. While it may include the entire property, it may also only include two rooms or one building. They only have the right to search the specified areas. There are exceptions. If the LEO's are on their way to a location outlined in the warrant and they witness probable cause in another area that was not outlined in the warrant, the LEO's now have the right to search that area. This is why you escort them.

Another important thing is that in most states any area that is explicitly locked needs a search warrant on its own. This technically means that an LEO actually needs a search warrant to search the trunk of your car or some "gloveboxes".

The most important thing to remember though, is that the law is that if you dont explicitly exercise your rights then they are essentially considered null and void and that you "opted out". An LEO will not observe your rights unless you express them. When they come to the door with a warrant that is written for just two rooms they will walk in like they own the place and go into any room most of the time. They will do this unless you call them out on the rules set forth in the warrant. Your being silent will be considered as conceding your rights, this is pretty much protocol.