The judge ruled that the police obtained a bogus search warrant and that the evidence collected in the search was inadmissible. The Commonwealth Attorney dropped the case after losing the evidence.

 

Judge dismisses drug case after ruling evidence inadmissible

So, what didn't they follow? I assume there's more to it than that.

The judge ruled that the police obtained a bogus search warrant and that the evidence collected in the search was inadmissible. The Commonwealth Attorney dropped the case after losing the evidence.

 

Judge dismisses drug case after ruling evidence inadmissible

 

Any more details on the wrong doing? Story in link is very short on details.

Sounds like they used the old "I smell marijuana" excuse and conducted their own search.

 

West Kentucky Star - News

I miss her doing the weather.

The judge ruled that the police obtained a bogus search warrant and that the evidence collected in the search was inadmissible. The Commonwealth Attorney dropped the case after losing the evidence.

 

Judge dismisses drug case after ruling evidence inadmissible

 

I missed the word "bogus" in the article. And a judge had to sign said warrant right?

This is the "weather girl" that was arrested? Is this a case of "White Privilege" and being semi famous with a little bit of money?

Idk, I just know I know what curtilage is and case law on it....and I know I miss her as the weather girl

I missed the word "bogus" in the article. And a judge had to sign said warrant right?

 

The second article said that the officers used information obtained in a bad search to obtain said warrant. It goes into more detail in that second link. They used the "do you smell marijuana" reason to conduct their search. Once they went around back and climbed on to some landscaping they saw the marijuana and used that information to get the warrant.

The second article said that the officers used information obtained in a bad search to obtain said warrant. It goes into more detail in that second link. They used the "do you smell marijuana" reason to conduct their search. Once they went around back and climbed on to some landscaping they saw the marijuana and used that information to get the warrant.

 

I'm familiar with the case, just pointing out that the word bogus wasn't used and let's not forget someone had to sign the search warrant when the troopers listed their PC for the warrant...

I'm familiar with the case, just pointing out that the word bogus wasn't used and let's not forget someone had to sign the search warrant when the troopers listed their PC for the warrant...

 

If it wasn't bogus then why was it suppresed? Perhaps because the officers were not truthful about how they obtained this probable cause? The judge seems to think so.

If it wasn't bogus then why was it suppresed? Perhaps because the officers were not truthful about how they obtained this probable cause? The judge seems to think so.

 

Are you playing stupid? It's the word "bogus", and someone with a lot more education than the troopers signed off on the search warrant.

If it wasn't bogus then why was it suppresed? Perhaps because the officers were not truthful about how they obtained this probable cause? The judge seems to think so.

 

Seems they were pretty damn truthful saying they smelled it and walked around back into the landscaping. It was the going into the landscape out back, aka curtilage, which is what caused the evidence to be suppressed.

Are you playing stupid? It's the word "bogus", and someone with a lot more education than the troopers signed off on the search warrant.

 

And it was ruled that they should not have been given that search warrant because the probable cause that the presented was not properly obtained. Basically they fooled the first judge in to granting them a warrant that they should not have been given. I see that as a bogus warrant, especially given that all evidence gained from it has been ruled inadmissible now. I'm just spit balling here but I don't think that would have happened to evidence gained from a properly obtained warrant. I think that is how it works.

Seems they were pretty damn truthful saying they smelled it and walked around back into the landscaping. It was the going into the landscape out back, aka curtilage, which is what caused the evidence to be suppressed.

 

Ahhh, so you are saying that the judge that signed the warrant had never heard of curtilage then?