4 ms·
I'm surprised that nobody's commented on Gawker's legal response to the search, in which they point out that the search warrant (or, at least, the scanned copy
by stevenbedrick 16y ago
I'm surprised that nobody's commented on Gawker's legal response to the search, in which they point out that the search warrant (or, at least, the scanned copy on Gizmodo's web site) clearly shows that a "night search" was unauthorized, whereas the search of Chen's home just as clearly took place at night. Does that mean that the search was unlawful?
- zephyrfalcon 16y agoAccording to http://law.onecle.com/california/penal/1533.html http://law.onecle.com/california/penal/1533.html: "Upon a showing of good cause, the magistrate may, in his or her discretion, insert a direction in a search warrant that it may be served at any time of the day or night. In the absence of such a direction, the warrant shall be served only between the hours of 7 a.m. and 10 p.m."
- stevenbedrick 16y agoHuh. Well, I guess that answers that... thanks (to both repliers) for looking into it.
- rookie 16y agoCalifornia Penal Code 1533 In the absence of such a direction, the warrant shall be served only between the hours of 7 a.m. and 10 p.m. Since Jason didn't get home until 9:45 and the police had been there for 'a few hours already' it did not start as a night search. IANAL but it is up to someone else to say if that means that the police needed to stop at 10pm or not.