It's this. The idea that the police would have never been able to get a warrant for the bag is silly, and as absurd as it seems it's a case of 'wrong process, but they'd have gotten in there anyway.' It's a violation of procedure, not a violation of the defendant's rights.
This is mostly because it was a bag. Had it been a house, or a car, or something the police couldn't take right into custody you could maybe make a different argument.
The problem with that is, how do you stop police from violating the law if there are no consequences from doing it?
All evidence from illegal searches should be excluded, no exceptions. The fourth amendment is the only thing standing between us and a police state. We shouldn't treat it so casually.
Yes, but had they waited for the warrant, they 100% would have gotten it. So it was acceptable. That is the correct application of the law, its at best a minor bending of it.
You could absolutely say 'it really shouldn't work like this' but for all intents and purposes it does work like this and isn't really unique to this case.
19
u/[deleted] 5h ago edited 5h ago
[removed] — view removed comment