How Can Police Exceed the Scope of a Search Warrant?
A search warrant grants police officers the authority to search a specific location and seize specific items as outlined in the warrant. However, officers must adhere strictly to the scope of the warrant, and exceeding that scope can lead to the suppression of evidence. The case of State v. Lambert, 710 P.2d 693 (Kan. 1985), provides a clear example of when law enforcement oversteps the bounds of a search warrant, particularly when it comes to searching individuals or their belongings who are not named or described in the warrant.
Understanding the Scope of a Search Warrant
The scope of a search warrant is determined by its specific terms. The warrant typically describes:
The location to be searched (e.g., a house, apartment, or vehicle).
The items to be seized, which may include drugs, firearms, or other evidence related to a crime.
The individuals named in the warrant, if any, who are subject to search or arrest.
In general, police officers are not permitted to search people or their personal belongings unless those individuals are named in the warrant or there is probable cause or another legal justification for the search.
The Facts of State v. Lambert
In State v. Lambert, police obtained a search warrant for an apartment and its resident, Randy, on suspicion of drug activity. When executing the warrant, the officers found three women in the apartment, none of whom were named in the warrant. The officers discovered marijuana and a partially burned cigarette on a tray between two women sitting at a kitchen table. They arrested all three women for possession of marijuana and then searched a purse on the table. Inside the purse, the officers found marijuana and amphetamines. The purse belonged to one of the women, Lambert, who was subsequently arrested for possession of drugs.
Lambert filed a motion to suppress the evidence found in her purse, arguing that the search exceeded the scope of the warrant. The trial judge initially denied the motion but later reversed the decision and suppressed the evidence, finding that the officers had no legal basis to search Lambert's purse.
The Legal Issue: Exceeding the Scope of the Warrant
The key legal question in this case was whether the officers had the right to search Lambert’s purse, despite the fact that she was not named in the search warrant and there was no specific indication that her belongings were involved in any criminal activity.
The State relied on Kansas statute K.S.A. 22-2509, which allows officers executing a search warrant to detain and search individuals present at the scene if necessary:
To protect themselves from attack or
To prevent the disposal or concealment of evidence described in the warrant.
However, the court concluded that this statute does not give officers unlimited authority to search anyone present at the scene of a warrant execution. In this case, there was no reason to believe Lambert, or her purse, was involved in the illegal activity described in the warrant.
When Does an Officer Exceed the Scope of a Warrant?
Officers exceed the scope of a search warrant when they go beyond the specific authorizations outlined in the warrant, particularly in cases where they:
Search individuals not named in the warrant without additional justification: A person’s mere presence in a location being searched is not sufficient to justify searching them or their belongings unless certain conditions are met. In Lambert, the officers searched a purse belonging to someone not named in the warrant, without probable cause or exigent circumstances to support the search.
Search belongings not connected to the named suspect: The officers in Lambert had no reason to believe that the purse on the table belonged to Randy, the person named in the warrant. Without probable cause linking the purse to Randy or any illegal activity, the officers had no legal grounds to search it.
Rely solely on proximity to criminal activity: The court in Lambert noted that a person’s mere nearness to others who are suspected of a crime does not create probable cause to search them. The officers did not have any evidence that Lambert, or her purse, was involved in illegal activity simply because she was in the same room as marijuana.
Exceptions Where Police Can Search Individuals or Their Belongings
Although officers are generally limited to the terms of the search warrant, there are circumstances where they can legally search individuals or their belongings even if they are not named in the warrant. These circumstances include:
Consent: If the individual voluntarily consents to the search, the officer may proceed. In Lambert, there was no indication that Lambert consented to the search of her purse.
Items in Plain View: If an officer sees illegal items in plain view during the execution of a warrant, they may seize the items without needing additional probable cause. In this case, the marijuana and cigarette on the tray between the two women were in plain view, which justified the officers' initial arrest of the women for drug possession. However, this justification did not extend to the search of Lambert's purse.
Search Incident to a Valid Arrest: If an individual is lawfully arrested, officers may search the person and their immediate belongings as part of the arrest. In Lambert, the court found that Lambert's arrest for possession of marijuana was based solely on the presence of drugs in her purse, which had been unlawfully searched. Thus, the arrest was not valid, and the search incident to arrest exception did not apply.
Probable Cause and Exigent Circumstances: If officers have probable cause to believe that an individual is involved in criminal activity and exigent circumstances exist (e.g., the risk of evidence being destroyed), they may be able to conduct a search without a warrant. In Lambert, the officers did not have probable cause to believe Lambert was involved in the criminal activity outlined in the warrant, nor were there any exigent circumstances justifying a search of her purse.
The Court’s Decision in State v. Lambert
The Kansas Supreme Court upheld the suppression of the evidence found in Lambert’s purse, affirming that the search exceeded the scope of the search warrant. The court emphasized that the officers had no legal justification to search Lambert’s purse because:
She was not named in the search warrant.
The purse was not connected to the named suspect.
There was no probable cause or other legal grounds to search her belongings.
The court concluded that a person's mere presence at the scene of a search does not give police the right to search them or their belongings without further evidence. Since none of the exceptions to warrantless searches applied, the evidence obtained from the illegal search of Lambert’s purse was properly suppressed.
Key Takeaways: When Does an Officer Exceed the Scope of a Search Warrant?
A police officer exceeds the scope of a search warrant when:
They search individuals not named in the warrant without consent, probable cause, or exigent circumstances.
They search personal belongings not connected to the person or premises described in the warrant without legal justification.
They rely solely on proximity to criminal activity to justify a search, which is not enough to establish probable cause.
Officers executing a warrant must carefully adhere to its terms. They are authorized to search the specific places and seize the specific items described in the warrant, and must have additional legal justification if they want to search other individuals or their belongings.
Conclusion: Limits on Search Authority Under a Warrant
The case of State v. Lambert serves as a clear reminder that police officers do not have unlimited authority when executing a search warrant. While officers can search the premises and seize items described in the warrant, they cannot extend their search to individuals or their belongings without specific legal reasons. If they do, any evidence obtained from the unlawful search may be suppressed, as was the case with the evidence found in Lambert's purse.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
Can police search everyone present during the execution of a search warrant?
No, police cannot automatically search everyone present. They need additional legal justification, such as consent, probable cause, or a valid arrest, to search individuals not named in the warrant.What does "exceeding the scope of a warrant" mean?
Exceeding the scope of a warrant occurs when police search areas, individuals, or items not authorized by the warrant or when they act beyond the warrant’s specific terms without legal justification.Can police search a guest’s belongings during a search warrant execution?
No, unless the guest consents to the search, there is probable cause, or another legal exception applies, police cannot search a guest’s belongings during a search warrant execution.What happens if police exceed the scope of a search warrant?
If police exceed the scope of a search warrant, any evidence obtained during the illegal search may be suppressed, meaning it cannot be used in court.Can police search items in plain view without a warrant?
Yes, if an item is in plain view and is clearly connected to criminal activity, police can seize it without needing additional legal authority.What should I do if my belongings were searched without a warrant?
If you believe your belongings were searched unlawfully, you should consult with an attorney to determine whether you can challenge the search and potentially suppress any evidence obtained.