Fails the BS test to me
Records of whistle-blower leaks seized during raid of investigative reporter linked to her husband who was convicted of resisting arrest. I dunno if resisting arrest is a felony in Maryland (the state has strange laws, include "common law misdemeanors" which are felonies under federal law (because the punishment is utterly up to the judge, a day of probation vs. life in prison)... but the Fourth amendments's requirement that for a residence the search warrant include a description of the property to be seized is still in effect.
isn't there court precedent that if something incriminating is in "plain view" then it's probable cause for arrest?
So if, for example, you call the police for a domestic disturbance and while in your home in response to the call, they see a pile of coke on your table they can arrest you for it?
Does that hold true while executing a search warrant? Even if the search warrant is for something else, if they see something incriminating in another way while conducting the search can they arrest you for it?
My guess is that's what they'll claim. I saw a story that says some of the documents they seized were marked as low level classified (Law Enforcement Eyes Only, or Government Use Only type stuff). My guess is they'll claim that those markings provided probable cause to seize them, even though that's not what they were ostensibly there to search for.
With my tin foil hat on, I would imagine the gun thing was just a pretense and the documents (including documents that identified the journalists sources) were what they were really there for to begin with, but the markings and probable cause will be their cover.
Or am I misunderstanding the case law here? I'm no lawyer. I don't even play one on TV.
Posted by: Sailorcurt at October 27, 2013 06:04 AM