police human-rights
What do I need to do about police unlawfully break in my house
<p>The copsArrested me on false charges use my car keys to use my house key to get into my home I found them on my camera cause neighbors said my house was raided while I was arrested and so it prompted me to watch my camera to see and just so happened the female cop called to transport me to jail suddenly got to busy so they transported me in back of k9 car with k9 and the woman was the first person to show in at my home that was the emergency she had to invade my home with out search warrant thereWe’re10 police officers at my home that night from 5pm /11pm searching my filing cabinets and chilling in my house the neighbor heard them call ga power to try And cut my camera system off didn’t work so they tried to manually do it and failed miserably I went to my local police station to ask was there any search warrants for my address that day and there was not so what is my rights</p>

<p>Of course you need a lawyer to represent you, and you can explain to that lawyer what happened. Based on what you say, I understand your allegation to be that the police broke into your house, obtained some evidence, then later arrested you based on that evidence. In some jurisdictions, this may be legal, but not in the US. The root problem is that a search in the US requires a warrant, consent, or is allowed in a very narrow set of contexts not matching your description. If the search was illegal, anything that flows from the search is also illegal, and your conviction (if it comes to that) should be overturned. Having a lawyer at the earliest possible stage simplifies the matter, because he will remind the police of these details of the law which they may have overlooked.</p>

<p><a href="/questions/tagged/australia" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;australia&#39;" rel="tag">australia</a></p>
<h2>Improperly obtained evidence can be used if the court allows</h2>
<p>Specifically, <a href="https://www.alrc.gov.au/publication/uniform-evidence-law-alrc-report-102/16-discretionary-and-mandatory-exclusions/exclusion-of-improperly-or-illegally-obtained-evidence/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">s138</a> of the Uniform Evidence Act (which is used Federally and in most states and territories) provides:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>evidence that was obtained improperly or illegally ‘is not to be admitted unless the desirability of admitting the evidence outweighs the undesirability of admitting evidence’ given the manner in which it was obtained.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This is a codification of the common law rule on evidence prevalent in most common law jurisdictions, the <a href="/questions/tagged/united-states" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;united-states&#39;" rel="tag">united-states</a> being a notable exception.</p>
<p>There are various factors the court has to consider but they basically boil down to: Are the interests of justice both in this case and more broadly better served by accepting or rejecting the tainted evidence?</p>

<p>Rules of evidence vary by jurisdiction, but there are minimum guarantees provided by the Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution.  Hire the best criminal defense attorney who takes cases in the jurisdiction where you were charged.  Then have a private consultation with your attorney regarding the suppression of evidence obtained in violation of the prohibition on unreasonable search or seizure.</p>
