Wednesday, June 29, 2011
Ind. Decisions - More on: Legislative Panel to Review High Court Ruling on Illegal Police Entry This Wednesday
I hope to do some coverage, as with the Charlie White hearing yesterday.
1:16 - Meeting convened. Sen. Steele passing out handouts.
Andy __ is testifying now. Says, starting on p. 3, Court discusses common law right, then, on p. 6, winds up with - in sum. Was the opinion intending to deal with both the common law right, and the statutory right?
Sen. L. - In ftnote at bottom of p. 4, we don't know what was tendered with the instruction at the trial level. Do we presume the Court simply thought the Castle doctrine was inapplicable in this case?
1:27 - Mark Cornell, legal counsel, State Police. We don't think it much changes what we do. Sweeping language at top of p. 6 doesn't clarly invalidate the statute, so we are treating it as if it exists. We have the standing concerns about resistance. Two trains hurdling toward each other. Also we have concerns about right to resist outside the home. In sum, we don't think the opinion gives ISP any greater right than it had before.
Steele - But you can understand how some lesser trained police agencies might have a different opinion.
Sen. L. - Qs re deterrence effect on police officers in execution of warrant. My concern is non-warrant entries.
Cornell - Yes, that was in the Barnes case, a domestic violence situation.
Rep. Turner - Are you saying there is such a fine line between law and unlawful entry that it may not be determined until weeks or months later?
How many are black and white, as opposed to iffy? Answer - its small.
1:43 pm. Sen. Young. Purpose is to protect citizens from gov., not the reverse. Cites 1975 case re public policy of state. Ours was clarified in 2006 in statute. Our concern should always be protecting the citizen from an unlawful entry ...
That is why we have asked the Court to reconsider in light of our statute. Maybe in some circumstance, such as dometic violence, we (GA) should make public policy change, but it should be the GA that does it.
Sen. L. - On p. 5, allowing resistance unnecessarily escalates violence, and where does that get us in the end, you are arrested anyway. Isn't there a point there?
Sen. Young - But why shouldn't law enforcement back away and get a proper warrant?
Rep. Turner - Other states? Young - 43 states have gotten rid of their common law, but they didn't have a statute. Here we have a statute first.
Sen. Steele. I think we need to deal with this or we will have abrogated our duties and it would look like we decided not to deal with it. Will be meeting throughout the summer. (2:03 pm)
Posted by Marcia Oddi on June 29, 2011 11:45 AM
Posted to Ind. Sup.Ct. Decisions