During a legal search of property, is there a "right to be present" for the accused?
486947
Let me try to give you an answer to the question you asked:\n\nIn California (this may vary by state, and you didn't say what state you're in), there is no right to be present for anyone, at any time, during any legal search.  \n\nIf you are present at a location during a search, you may very well be removed from the location during the search, depending on the circumstances.  It's possible you would even be detained during the search, and not allowed to leave the premises (inside or out) until such time as the search is over.\n\nAlso, just because someplace is being searched does not mean there is an "accused" as of yet.  Search warrants are frequently issued and served prior to any other kind of legal proceedings having been initiated.  At that point, there would be no "accused", only someone who is a suspect.
604383
If it's in your car, it's considered yours.\nIf it's an illegal search, the evidence is void.
224738
Not entirely sure I'm following your question.  \n\nIs it lawful for me to apply for and receive a search warrant for the premises of a dead person?  You betcha'...it would make murder investigations pretty difficult if not.  \n\nDoes there have to be PC to believe a prosecutable crime will be discovered?  Apples and oranges.  Search warrants are issued (at least in California), under the following conditions:\n\n(1) When the property was stolen or embezzled.\n(2) When the property or things were used as the means of\ncommitting a felony.\n(3) When the property or things are in the possession of any person with the intent to use them as a means of committing a public offense, or in the possession of another to whom he or she may have delivered them for the purpose of concealing them or preventing their being discovered.\n(4) When the property or things to be seized consist of any item or constitute any evidence that tends to show a felony has been committed, or tends to show that a particular person has committed a felony.\n(5) When the property or things to be seized consist of evidence that tends to show that sexual exploitation of a child, in violation of Section 311.3, or possession of matter depicting sexual conduct of a person under the age of 18 years, in violation of Section 311.11, has occurred or is occurring.\n(6) When there is a warrant to arrest a person.\n(7) When a provider of electronic communication service or remote computing service has records or evidence, as specified in Section 1524.3, showing that property was stolen or embezzled constituting a misdemeanor, or that property or things are in the possession of any person with the intent to use them as a means of committing a misdemeanor public offense, or in the possession of another to whom he or she may have delivered them for the purpose of concealing them or preventing their discovery.\n(8) When the property or things to be seized include an item or any evidence that tends to show a violation of Section 3700.5 of the Labor Code, or tends to show that a particular person has violated Section 3700.5 of the Labor Code.\n\nSo if any of these conditions apply, a search warrant can be issued.  I'm not sure what you mean by a "prosecutable crime," so it's a little tough to know how to answer you on this point.  All crimes are prosecutable unless there is some legal bar to prosecution (statute of limitations, etc).  \n\nIf I develop probable cause to indicate a stolen TV is in your house, I can seek a search warrant to seize it.  Even though you may not know anything about the TV, and may not even know it's in your house and therefore aren't going to be prosecuted for it, a search warrant can still be issued because the property is stolen.\n\nYou're also asking about PC for an unchargeable crime...and again, I'm not really certain what that means.  Let's take the TV example above, and throw in there that the statute of limitations for that crime has passed.  The TV is still stolen (and other sections would apply as well), so I can still get a search warrant.  \n\nIf you have a specific set of facts, they might be helpful in developing a better answer for you instead of the fairly generic question you've posted.  You're welcome to contact me if you think I can help more with this.
507611
ask a lawyer for the right and legal answer.
1096856
You may refuse the search. Once you give consent to search, you can repeal it at any time and the Police Officer must stop. The only time in which you have no choice is called search incident to arrest.\n\nIf they do not stop and find something it is not admissible in court. It's called "fruit of the poisonous tree" I hope this helps.  Cop in Maine
94247
Some attorneys give free consultation or Legal Aid may be of assistance.  A warrant means you can be arrested and the police can go anywhere to find you.  If disputing charges, don't be intimidated by shop owner.  Keep all records pertaining to this dispute.  Contact your state's Attorney General for advice (they are free also).
195338
Your rights are dependant on what is says in the original signed contract. If it states that the original owner has a right to come onto the property for a specified amount of time, to remove his left items, then that is legal up until that date at which point everything left after that date (unless specified in contract) becomes property of new owner and you could file trespass and theft charges against him. If he was supposed to have removed all items as agreed in contract by specified time, and did not do so, leaving you to clean up the mess, you could very well sue him for the amount it costs to remove the items. always keep records, photos, police reports etc, as they will help you in court. This is a civil matter and should be handled in a court of law but beware because sometimes small towns have their own way of doing things, not always legally. if the person whom you bought the property from is local with connections and friends of the courts It would have to be handled in a different juristiction were there is no conflict of interest.
507298
The 5th Admendemt protects agains self-incrimination.  The defendant has the right to counsel during the interrogation process.  MIRANDA PROCESS MIRANDA RIGHTS....\n\n\nThe right to remain silent, anything you say can and will be used against you in the court of law, you have the right to have a lawyer present during questioning, if you cannont afford a lawywe, one will be appointed for you.  Knowing and understanding these rights do wish to comtinue?
870743
The following apply to the United States of America,\nFirst, one must remember that the accused is entitled to his/her day in court and to confront the witnesses against him/her. Confront here means question in court, not go toe to toe.\nSecond, there is a principle known as discovery where the accused's attorney gets to see evidence, including statements made against the accused, in order to be able to mount a defense. Now there's the rub, the attorney might be unethical enough to reveal names of witnesses to the accused prior to trial.\nI would suggest speaking with the prosecuting attorney about your concerns.
804740
If they have a warrant, or reasonable cause, to search the house then they can search all of it.\n\nIf they actually admitted they needed to go get a warrant then anything they have already found is inadmissible in court, due to illegal search.
738283
If the search warrant is a reality, meaning if it exists, yes. You (the owner) can ask to see a copy of it and they must produce one or every thing they found is inadmissible in court. But you don't have to see it before they enter your home.
1182946
If that is really what the DA said then yes he is lying.  You are entirely entitled to view all the evidence that the People have against you, whether you have a lawyer or not.\n\nAs for the timing issue, it is not uncommon for defendants to not be given their discovery until after the arraignment.  Remember, the arraignment is simply the time when you enter a plea.  You don't need all the information at that point in time.  But you are entitled to all of the information before trial.
780641
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense. \n\n\nThe accused has the right to a quick trial. This does not mean that their trial must be over in one week. This means that the state can not make them sit in jail for 6 years while they wait to have a trial. That would be unfair to anyone who is innocent.\n\nThe accused also has the right to a public trial. The state can not put them in a warehouse and question them about the crime. It must be available to the public so that it is fairer to the accused.\n\nThe trial must be held by an impartial jury. The jurors can not be prejudiced against the accused or the crime that they've been accused of, or it would be unfair. \n\nThe trial must also be held in the area where the crime was committed, or else that could be unfair to the accused also.\n\nWhat if a dirty, homeless man was put on trial in a very rich neighborhood? They might think that he is guilty just because he is dirty or homeless. \nThe courts can not change the location from case to case either. It is already decided where the trial will be. Except in some cases, where it is sometimes better to move the trial to a different area because the accused face has been all over the local news and it would be impossible to get an impartial jury in the town where he/she lives.\n\nThe accused has the right to know what they are being charged with and why they're being held in jail. \n\nThe accused also has the right to know who is saying that they've committed the crime, and the right to ask them questions\n\nThe accused has the right to force anyone to come to their trial that they believe can help their case. The court can force someone to come to court by issuing a summons -or subpoena and then the person has no choice, but to come to the trial.\n\nThe accused also has the right to an attorney (a lawyer). If you can not afford an attorney, one will be given to you by the court. The Miranda case has made this right famous. Now whenever someone is arrested they are read their Miranda rights. These rights include the right to be silent, and the right to an attorney.
19455
Of course you have a right to know why. If I was in your situation, I would call the office of the prosecutor who issued to warrant. Inform them who you are, ask why there is a warrant out for your arrest, and arrange a time for you to turn yourself in. It may be something as simple as an unpaid ticket, then they will just want their money and will probably let you go, if it's something more serious, you can decide whether you need to bring a lawyer with you (which you should if they are arresting you). It will look good to the judge if you are willing to face the charges rather then them having to look for you, besides, I wouldn't want a warrant for my arrest hanging over my head. Good luck.
868104
You have the right to be represented by an attorney at every aspect of your criminal case - including the initial hearing.  Most courts require your appearance for an initial hearing so that you can be advised of the criminal charges and penalties.  You may not be required to attend future hearings but make sure you receive legal advise on that matter before you fail to appear.
992813
Thats an easy one. Just don't show up, you are the complaining witness in that case right?  If you dont show then theres no complaining witness, no complaining witness, no case, that means case dismissed. all charges dropped, but if the state picks up the charges you'll get a subpoena in the mail and you are compelled to show if you don't you get a capias for your arrest, and they make you testify anyway, but that probably wont happen.
199506
Unless you were notified you do not have to show up.  Once sharges have been filed it is out of your hands.  The state in which you live is the one pressing charges. So, unless your testimoney is crucial to their case you do not have to go.