Then the cost of the (fruitless) search warrant was sent to collections, and I now have debt collectors chasing me where the debt document literally says guarantor "ICE" on it.
If the dog handler lies 100% of the time, would you ever know?
[1] https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/11/05/man-seeks-mi...
So I complained to the nursing board, that the nurse had searched me without consent and without a signed court order after a doctor had explicitly noted I was fully alert and oriented and denied informed consent.
The nursing board denied the complaint, stating a nurse acting under the command of an officer is acting in a "search" and not bound by nurse practice act that would make it impermissable to act without a signed court order or informed consent (if individual alert and oriented, which dr documented I was).
That's the gambit. When you legally claim it was a search, they call it a "medical procedure." When you attack the medical procedure, they call it a search. They just flip flop so it's impossible to hold anyone accountable.
To be clear, not stating I agree with situation, fully understand law, your perspective, law enforcement perspective, etc — but claim that body cavity search requires a warrant once reasonable suspicion is established at a border crossing to my knowledge is inaccurate if you’re claiming it is.
Example of Google search that appears to return search results supporting this:
https://www.google.com/search?q=is+it+legal+for+us+customs+t...
Disputing reasonable cause is very hard to do. Most people would likely find it reasonable to be suspicious of a person lacking a cell phone. Also appears judge granted a warrant, which to me confirms they believed their the threshold for reasonable suspicion had been passed.
I don’t know what I stumbled upon but it definitely does not meet my threshold of reasonable suspicion to do an involuntary body cavity search for anyone solely because they do not own a cell phone.
Also I would hope the public pays for all costs of whatever involuntary search or medical procedure regardless of whether the search results in evidence of guilt but definitely if the search does not yield anything.
Way to address issues like this is not online or at a border crossing — but by changing laws themselves. I assure that vast majority of people support laws like these, otherwise they would not have been in place so long.
Again, I am not saying I agree with situation, but attempting to accurately describe the reality of it.
[1] https://edition.cnn.com/2014/01/16/justice/new-mexico-search...
Another note: depending on your state, you might have a lot of power in challenging the debt collection. Make sure you demand they send you proof that they hold the debt, that it is in your name, etc. even if the debt was legally applied to you, some debt collectors buy debt that is insufficiently documented.
I’m curious if a small claims court could help you.
Wait, am I understanding this correctly? You got a bill for a bullshit search warrant issued against you?
I'm not sure how that would even work.
https://www.findlaw.com/legalblogs/criminal-defense/when-do-...
In the case that agents use the already well established workarounds for 4A protections, the agents must still file for a warrant post hoc within 48 hours, which they didn’t do, hence the article.
And Stingrays / CSS devices are used, there is always an unreasonable search applied towards all phones accidentally intercepted, so there is good reason for both department policy to be followed, and for a judge to at least review this after the fact.
Your comment is lazy. The IG report exists for a reason. It removes almost all of the ambiguity you pretend might exist in these cases.