Posted by | May 13, 2011 23:42 | Filed under: Top Stories

The Indiana Supreme Court ruled that if people resist police who illegally enter a home, there is too much of a risk of violent confrontation. Any protest, the court stated, should be done in court, not at the time of the illegal entry.

“We believe … a right to resist an unlawful police entry into a home is against public policy and is incompatible with modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence,” [Justice Steven] David (pictured) said. “We also find that allowing resistance unnecessarily escalates the level of violence and therefore the risk of injuries to all parties involved without preventing the arrest.”

Justices Robert Rucker and Brent Dickson strongly dissented, saying the ruling runs afoul of the U.S. Constitution’s Fourth Amendment against unreasonable search and seizure…

“In my view the majority sweeps with far too broad a brush by essentially telling Indiana citizens that government agents may now enter their homes illegally — that is, without the necessity of a warrant, consent or exigent circumstances,” Rucker said…

The court’s decision stemmed from a Vanderburgh County case in which a man yelled at police and blocked them from entering his apartment to investigate a domestic disturbance. The man shoved a police officer who entered anyway and was shocked with a stun gun and arrested.

This is the second time this week the court decided against the right of citizens in a home.

On Tuesday, the court said police serving a warrant may enter a home without knocking if officers decide circumstances justify it. Previously, police serving a warrant had to obtain a judge’s permission to enter without knocking.

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2011 Liberaland
By: Alan

Alan Colmes is the publisher of Liberaland.