{"id":2928,"date":"2009-03-28T09:19:54","date_gmt":"2009-02-09T07:32:16","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2009-02-09T07:32:16","slug":"en-US","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=2928","title":{"rendered":"OR: Excusionary rule not applied in dependency proceeding"},"content":{"rendered":"

The exclusionary rule would not be applied to exclude evidence of a father’s drug use in a dependency proceeding because it was a civil case and he had an insufficient liberty interest involved. State ex rel. HHS v. W.P. (In re W. L. P)<\/a>, 345 Ore. 657, 202 P.3d 167 (2009):<\/p>\n

We turn to a consideration of the nature of father’s liberty interest in this juvenile dependency proceeding. Obviously, this is not a criminal proceeding. See Geist, 310 Ore. at 188 (holding that proceeding to terminate parental rights, which is one possible outcome of a juvenile dependency proceeding, is not a criminal prosecution). Neither is it like the probation revocation proceeding in Rogers, because father does not face incarceration or similar criminal law sanctions as a result of this proceeding. The proceeding does not involve any effort by the state to punish the parent for wrongdoing. Rather, in a juvenile dependency proceeding, the welfare of the child is the court’s primary consideration, and the state’s purpose in initiating such a proceeding is to intervene as necessary to protect the child. See ORS 419B.100(1)(c) (child found to be within jurisdiction of court if child’s condition or circumstances “endanger the welfare” of child); ORS 419B.331 (permitting court to place child under protective supervision “[w]hen the court determines it would be in the best interest and welfare of a ward”); ORS 419B.476 (requiring that court “consider the ward’s health and safety the paramount concerns” at permanency hearing). Because this case does not implicate father’s liberty interest in remaining free from state custody, Rogers does not require the court to exclude the evidence based on father’s motion, even if the evidence was unlawfully seized.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Defense counsel was not ineffective for not filing a motion to suppress. Defendant had standing, but there was consent. Robertson v. State<\/a>, 2009 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 88 (February 5, 2009).*<\/p>\n

Defendant could not claim Randolph<\/a> was new law where it was decided a year before the suppression hearing. Jackson v. State<\/a>, 2009 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 72 (February 4, 2009).*<\/p>\n

Knock-and-talk in the evening was valid, and officer saw drugs in plain view when the door was opened. Defendant who was a visitor abandoned drugs when he saw the officer. State v. Patton<\/a>, 2009 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 68 (February 2, 2009).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"pingsdone","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2928","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2928","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=2928"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2928\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=2928"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=2928"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=2928"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}