On May 31, 2018 at approximately 1446 hours, I was dispatched to the Walmart located at 8701 US HWY 19 Port Richey, FL in reference to a W/M and W/F in the store concealing merchandise. Upon my arrival, I made contact with the complainant, Walmart Loss Prevention Associate Marion Edwards. Marion directed me to a W/M and W/F he advised were acting suspicious. He advised the subjects had loaded a shopping cart with hundreds of dollars worth of merchandise and were concealing merchandise in a plastic tote. Marion requested the subjects be issued trespass warnings from the store. Officer D. Peal (9003) was responding as a backup officer, but was a few minutes away. I decided to proceed to the front of the store and await his arrival before …show more content…
Peal (9003) arrived on scene and the W/F was detained in handcuffs as well. Both subjects were escorted to the Walmart loss prevention office to start the trespass paperwork. The W/M was identified by his name and date of birth as Calvin Michael Mcbride. The W/F was identified by her name and date of birth as Brandy Nicole Knox. A PRPD records check revealed neither subject had been issued a trespass warning from the property before. An NCIC / FCIC check revealed Calvin had an active warrant of Pasco County Florida. Pasco County warrant 2018CF002671CFAXWS count 1, DWLSR 3rd or subsequent offence (direct file) and count2, reckless driving (direct file) was confirmed by Dispatcher M. Rudy (989). Calvin was placed under arrest for the active warrant and a search incident to arrest was conducted. In Calvin’s left shorts pocket a case was discovered. The case contained three baggies of a crystal substance I believe to be methamphetamine due to my training and experience. The case also contained a syringe, a scale with visible crystal residue and numerous empty …show more content…
He agreed to speak with law enforcement and stated the case the narcotics / paraphernalia had been in was not his. He would not tell me who the case belonged to and claimed he did not know what was in it. He claimed he was unaware he had an active warrant and stated he had tried to flee the store at the sight of law enforcement because he was planning on committing a retail theft and was scared he was about to be caught. Brandy was read Miranda from an agency issued card, verbally acknowledged she understood her rights and agreed to speak with law enforcement. She admitted they had been planning on committing a retail theft at the store. Brandy advised Calvin wanted to leave the store at the sight of law enforcement because he knew he had an active arrest warrant and had methamphetamine on him. She advised Calvin had told her he planned on running if he was approached by police as they were leaving the store. At the request of Marion, Brandy was issued a trespass warning from the property. She verbally acknowledged she would face arrest if she returned to the property. She signed the warning and left the property. At the request of Marion Calvin was also issued a trespass warning. He verbally acknowledged he would face arrest if he returned to the property, however he was in handcuffs and unable to sign the
This case involves suspect Lucy Cisneros Bermudez being arrested for HS 11364(A) – Drug Paraphernalia. A records check revealed that Bermudez had an outstanding warrant out of San Bernardino County. Bermudez was transported to The Pasadena City Jail, where she was booked for HS 11364(A) and her outstanding warrant out of San Bernardino County.
On Friday, 09/23/2016, at approximately 0830 hours, I, Deputy Stacy Stark #1815 met with the reporting party, James R. Boucher (M/W, DOB: 07/25/1959) at the Jackson County Sheriff’s Office. I requested James R. Boucher to come to the Jackson County Sheriff’s Office to review the Wal-Mart video footage I collected and identify the suspect, James Roy Boucher (M/W, DOB: 03/16/1978) on the video footage.
The police responded to a tip that a home was being used to sell drugs. When they arrived at the home, Gant answered the door and stated that he expected the owner to return home later. The officers left and did a record check of Gant and found that his driver’s license had been suspended and there was a warrant for his arrest. The officers returned to the house later that evening and Gant wasn’t there. Gant returned shortly and was recognized by officers. He parked at the end of the driveway and exited his vehicle and was placed under arrest 10 feet from his car and was placed in the back of the squad car immediately. After Gant was secured, two officers searched his car and found a gun and a bag of cocaine.
Facts: On December 4, 2012 the case involved Sandra Primrose as plaintiff versus Wal-Mart Stores, INC., as defendant presented in the hearing trial court. Ms. Primrose who was 73 years old at the time claimed that because of the Wal-Mart’s watermelon signs was display in the wrong area, where she was tripped and fell over the corner of the sign on September 09, 2009, and had caused her injuries while trying to transporting the watermelon to her shopping cart. She didn’t filled out the damage reported until September 09 of 2010. On October 15, 2012, Wal’Mart filed a motion for summary judgment request. According to Scott Harden who’s the store manager in this location during the incident was occur claimed that the signs have been in-used for
...e police officers. Miranda established the precedent that a citizen has a right to be informed of his or her rights before the police attempt to violate them with the intent that the warnings erase the inherent coercion of the situation. The Court's violation of this precedent is especially puzzling due to this case's many similarities to Miranda.
nvestigator Tidwell and I went to Searcy PD to interview Scruggs. After making contact with Scruggs an advice and understanding of rights form was completed. Post Miranda Scruggs stated that he was walking down Vinson Rd and saw a black car sitting in the front yard of a house. Scruggs stated he used a pair of pliers to enter the rear door of the house to try and find the keys to the car. Scruggs entered the house and found the keys by the refrigerator along with a purse that contained a debit card. Scruggs stated that he grabbed the items, and then found a small revolver in the kitchen drawer along with bottle of Methadone. Scruggs stated that he also got a flat screen tv. Scruggs stated that he left in the car and took the items to a friend’s
The decision requires law enforcement officers to follow a code of conduct when arresting suspects. After an arrest is made, before they may begin questioning they must first advise the suspect of their rights, and make sure that the suspect understands them. These rights are known as the Miranda Warnings and include:
Mr. Moreno was charged in district court with various drug offenses and with being a felon in possession of a firearm. He entered a guilty plea to possession with intent to distribute more than fifty grams of a substance containing a detectable amount of methamphetamine and possession of a firearm by a prohibited person
Appellant was arrested on suspicion of possession of a controlled substance with intent to distribute. R. 4,5. A grand jury indictment was granted for possession of DHTC, with intent to distribute. R. 3. Prior to trial, Appellant filed a motion to suppress evidence based on the unreasonableness of the detective’s search of Appellant’s home. R. 8-11.
The plaintiff in Mitchell activated the store’s antishoplifting device alarm while exiting the store. Id. at 632. The store security guard detained her by taking her shopping bag and investigating the items inside of the bag. Id. In Colonial Stores the court held that the store did not detain the plaintiff in a reasonable time because the store did not conduct an investigation while the plaintiff was being detained. Colonial Stores, Inc. v Fishel, 288 S.E.2d 21, 23 (Ga. App. 1981). The store manager and security guard in Colonial Stores detained the plaintiff without investigating further to see if the plaintiff was guilty of shoplifting. Id. The court stated that the purpose of detaining someone suspected of shoplifting was to investigate. Id. The store’s failure to investigate makes them liable for false imprisonment according to the court in Colonial Stores.
Upon arrival I spoke with Lynn Klann. Lynn stated she was walking her dog around 6pm, when she saw the male that lives at 105 Hawaiian shove his girlfriend down the outside stairs. Lynn stated the female yelled call the police. Lynn stated she retrieved her cellphone and witness the female trying to get out the front door of the residence. Lynn stated she yelled to the female “do you want me to call the cops”. Lynn stated before the female could answer the male pulled her into the residence. Lynn states she yelled she was calling the police. Lynn stated the male yelled “I will burn your shit down too”.
The defendant, a resident of Miami-Dade County, was arrested and charged with drug trafficking. He was also cited for speeding. He was booked into the Martin County Jail and held on a $200,000 bond. According to media reports,
When officers arrived at the living area of Johnson and his roommate, Benner Brewer, they did not have a warrant to search Johnson’s area, which violated his 4th amendment rights against a warrantless search.
In July 2003, Sheriff’s Deputy Todd Shanks of Multnomah County Oregon was performing a routine traffic stop on a vehicle driven by William Barrett. During this stop, Shanks arrested Barrett because of an outstanding warrant and then searched the car. A pressure-cooker found in the trunk was believed to be used in the making of methamphetamine. Barrett informed Shanks that the owner of the pressure-cooker was “Gunner Crapser,” and that he could be found at the Econolodge Motel in a room registered to a woman named Summer Twilligear (FindLaw, 2007, Factual and Procedural Background section, para. 2). Deputy Shanks quickly learned that there was an outstanding warrant for a “Gunner Crapser” but to not confuse the wanted man, whose name was not actually “Gunner Crapser,” with someone else using this name.
The next step for the officer that observed the baggie of Marijuana and the bong would be to enter the home. The reason for this is because there are plenty of exceptions for a police officer to enter a home, without a warrant or without consent. First would be if the items were in plain view: Meaning if an officer is at your property, in this case for a domestic call, or if the officers are there for a valid reason and the officer see’s marijuana or any criminal objects on plain view or in plain sight (table, coffee table, kitchen table, counters) then the search becomes valid and the stuff can be seized as evidence and the evidence cannot be suppressed. Next exception would be open field’s doctrine: familiar to the pain view; but some what different. If a Marijuana plant is discovered in an ‘open field’ (almost like plain view) the owner or owners have no exception of privacy even if you can prove that officer were trespassing when the ‘objects’ were found. This is because the supreme court states that all citizens do not have a ‘reasonable’ exception of privacy in open fields since the 4th amendment only protects the person, house, papers and it doesn’t extend to any open fields. Furthermore, exigent circumstances: Is if a police officer respond to a domestic