Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
Is it legal for the police to arrest without a warrant in this situation?
Here's the story...
I live in the state of New Hampshire. A couple months ago my brother got into some trouble, missed his court date, and therefore had a warrant put out for his arrest. He was living with my mother at the time and they weren't getting along, and she didn't want to get into any trouble for housing someone with a warrant so she went to the police station to see if they could go and pick him up. The cop saw that her eyes were red, puffy, and watery and assumed it was because she was drunk, which was not the case. She had been crying for a couple hours, fighting with my brother, so of course her eyes were red and puffy. The cop asked her to do the breathalizer test and she refused. They ended up arresting her even though they had no proof that she had been driving drunk.
At court the other day, the cop admitted that no officer had actually seen her driving and that they had no surveillance footage of her driving either. The judge seems to think that this was not a legal arrest because no one actually saw her driving and she wasn't removed from a vehicle by the police, and that the police would have needed to issue an arrest warrant in order for it to be a legal arrest. If they had actually seen her driving or if she'd actually been pulled over by police, then it would have been a legal arrest without a warrant. But that's not the case, so the judge thinks they would have needed an arrest warrant in order to arrest her, and he's considering throwing out the case.
The judge is giving my mother and the prosecutor a chance to write memorandum.
I'm just wondering if this was a legal arrest, or did they need a warrant?
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR ANY HELPFUL ANSWERS!
The judge kept comparing the case to a shoplifting case, explaining that if someone at a store steals something and an employee at the store sees it and holds the customer in the store while they wait for police to come, the police have to get an arrest warrant because the police didn't actually see it happen. And if they didn't get a warrant and arrested the person, the person would then be free to leave on their own because they NEED the warrant.
And since they had no proof she was actually driving, they need a warrant in order to arrest her on a drunk driving charge. They could certainly arrest her for public intoxication, but without any proof she actually drove, they'd need a warrant to arrest her. Because it's certainly possible that I drove my mother in her car to the police station, my husband followed in his car, and when we arrived at the police station I left with my husband, and my mother went into the police station.
Keep in mind, this is in the state of New Hampshire, so the laws may be completely different from other states. And it's the judge that is saying the cops didn't have the right to arrest her, not me. So for those people saying "they don't need a warrant every time" and stuff like that... well, you're dumb, 'cause the judge is saying that they do. I'm just trying to verify this.
Caoedhen...
lol Did you even read my whole question? You're a moron. When did I say an officer needs a warrant for EVERY arrest? I didn't say that, or anything even close to that. Only TWO examples of situations where a warrant WOULD BE necessary were mentioned. And in these two situations it IS necessary to have an arrest warrant. You can't arrest someone for drunk driving if the person was never witnessed driving without a warrant. Duh.
"Your shoplifting example is pure bullshit, in all states."
READ THE DETAILS AGAIN...
"The judge kept comparing the case to a shoplifting case..."
So it's not MY shoplifting example... that's the example the judge gave... and I'd assume he knows what he's talking about, or else he wouldn't have the right to be judge. I mean, I certainly would trust that someone who went to school to become a judge and has been a judge for many years would know more on the subject than a retarded amateur photographer.
lol And what's so unbelievable about my story
8 Answers
- Anonymous1 decade agoFavorite Answer
They were assuming she had to get to the police station somehow and driving was the most logical explanation. The police were wrong and will find out when your mother gets an attorney and sues the police and everyone else in sight.
Source(s): Retired Police Officer - Mr PlacidLv 71 decade ago
The police need only "probable cause" to make a warrantless arrest.
It is not necessary to actually "see" someone driving to arrest for drunk driving. There only needs to be "probable cause" that someone was driving, and that the someone was drunk. There are lots of ways to establish "probable cause" without actual eyewitness testimony. For instance, if your mom lives 10 miles away from the station, and mom is 60 years old, and there are no bus routes to the station, and mom entered the station by herself, then mom "probably" drove to the station. She certainly did not walk. That "probably" is all that is necessary to make an arrest.
Now, once in court, the government must prove "beyond a reasonable doubt" that mom was actually driving. There is a huge difference between "probable cause" and "beyond a reasonable doubt."
But, the cop at the station was obviously an idiot. He should have just asked, "How did you get here?" Idiot police work, but a lucky break for your mom.
- CaoedhenLv 71 decade ago
No, we aren't dumb, because there is no need for a warrant for every arrest made, in New Hampshire or any other state of the union. Your shoplifting example is pure bullshit, in all states.
I don't believe your story for a second. unless you are in the most backwoods area in the state and the cops aren't required to have any training, nor is the judge.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
You don't need a warrant everytime you arrest someone. People get arrested for suspicion all the time. She shouldn't have been charged with anything though since the cop didn't see her driving.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- ?Lv 45 years ago
there is not any case for the Police Officer. i'm shocked the prosecutor could even evaluate taking this occasion to courtroom. Having bloodshot eyes is only considered one of a number of aspects in determining no be counted if somebody has been eating. i don't comprehend what this choose is all approximately the two. He ought to have pushed aside this occasion before everything. i could evaluate speaking to a civil criminal expert approximately this arrest. it ought to have not at all happened.
- ?Lv 41 decade ago
The cop does has the right to arrest you if he thinks that you did something bad. He does not have to have a warrant. However, in this case he did not have enough evidence. But I am sure that if it is proven she will be released.
Source(s): Knowledge
