Landowner Sues After State Searches Property Without Warrant or Consent • Hacker News Board

Re: Landowner Sues After State Searches Property Without Warrant or Consent

#21

Post by recursivedoubts » Wed, Oct 23, 2024, 6:34 PM UTC

riskable wrote: post #18

I'm torn on this one: Should law enforcement need a warrant to search your property? Certainly. Seems obvious, right? Except this is a "conservation officer" who has been granted certain rights (by the state of PA) to: Enter upon any land or water in the performance of their duties. See: https://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/LI/consCheck.cfm?... If they couldn't move between properties along shorelines they'd ha…

The fourth amendment is more important than catching people illegally fishing.

Re: Landowner Sues After State Searches Property Without Warrant or Consent

#22

Post by gs17 » Wed, Oct 23, 2024, 6:35 PM UTC

riskable wrote: post #18

I'm torn on this one: Should law enforcement need a warrant to search your property? Certainly. Seems obvious, right? Except this is a "conservation officer" who has been granted certain rights (by the state of PA) to: Enter upon any land or water in the performance of their duties. See: https://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/LI/consCheck.cfm?... If they couldn't move between properties along shorelines they'd ha…

> (by the state of PA)

The Fourth Amendment is a level above that, fortunately.

Re: Landowner Sues After State Searches Property Without Warrant or Consent

#23

Post by gjsman-1000 » Wed, Oct 23, 2024, 6:36 PM UTC

riskable wrote: post #18

I'm torn on this one: Should law enforcement need a warrant to search your property? Certainly. Seems obvious, right? Except this is a "conservation officer" who has been granted certain rights (by the state of PA) to: Enter upon any land or water in the performance of their duties. See: https://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/LI/consCheck.cfm?... If they couldn't move between properties along shorelines they'd ha…

What an objection. My state, until recently, gave officers the on-paper ability to arrest and charge anyone guilty of adultery with a misdemeanor. I doubt you would have appreciated the investigation or enforcement of that statute - or many others still on the books.

Re: Landowner Sues After State Searches Property Without Warrant or Consent

#24

Post by Suppafly » Wed, Oct 23, 2024, 6:37 PM UTC

riskable wrote: post #18

I'm torn on this one: Should law enforcement need a warrant to search your property? Certainly. Seems obvious, right? Except this is a "conservation officer" who has been granted certain rights (by the state of PA) to: Enter upon any land or water in the performance of their duties. See: https://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/LI/consCheck.cfm?... If they couldn't move between properties along shorelines they'd ha…

Moving along a shoreline is different from trespassing on the curtilage of someone's home.

Re: Landowner Sues After State Searches Property Without Warrant or Consent

#25

Post by dmitrygr » Wed, Oct 23, 2024, 6:38 PM UTC

gs17 wrote: post #16

dmitrygr wrote: post #9

> According to 12 words of Pennsylvania state code, PFBC officials have authority to “enter upon any land or water in the performance of their duties.” The statue provides wide latitude for PFBC to enter onto any property without consent, probable cause, or warrant—with no limits on duration, frequency, or scope. Say what? That is how you get shot in rural america, as you should...

A similar case in VA had the state official sneak in wearing camouflage and steal the person's property: https://ij.org/case/virginia-open-fields/ I really have to wonder how it would be ruled if he had ran out with a gun and shot at the thief.

>I really have to wonder how it would be ruled if he had ran out with a gun and shot at the thief.

Similar things have happened a few times (eg [1]) often no charges are filed

[1] https://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/fort-worth-man-who-shot-st...

Re: Landowner Sues After State Searches Property Without Warrant or Consent

#26

Post by colechristensen » Wed, Oct 23, 2024, 6:39 PM UTC

superkuh wrote: post #6

The public figure conservation officer with the implied vendetta can be viewed on page 47/52 of this pdf https://www.fishandboat.com/About-Us/Angler-and-Boater/Legac... . It is a public document showing a public function where he received an award. The PDF is available on a government website and intentionally published for and accessible by the public.

There is no reason any of us need to see this.

Re: Landowner Sues After State Searches Property Without Warrant or Consent

#27

Post by busterarm » Wed, Oct 23, 2024, 6:39 PM UTC

crooked-v wrote: post #5

I'm badly split on Institute for Justice, the nonprofit backing this suit. On the one hand, they aggressively advocate for obvious constitutional rights cases like this one and have put a lot of effort into fighting legally-accepted-yet-fundamentally-nonsensical practices like civil forfeiture. On the other, they also aggressively support school vouchers, which are mostly a scheme to drain money from public schools i…

So you're saying you don't want parents to have the choice to send their children to better performing schools and provide better opportunities for their children?

Or are you saying that should only be a privilege of the rich?

Having gone to both public and private schools, while I had horrible experiences with both, at least there was teaching going on in my private schools.

My public school experience was horrific, even in NYC's so-called "gifted" schools. My brother's kid only went to NYC public schools and her experiences were so much worse. My public school tried to have me put on psychiatric medication without a diagnosis from a qualified professional and my niece's public school spent two years trying to gaslight her that she was not gay but trans (as well as a whole bunch targeted harassment from her teachers for being vocally politically conservative).

Neither of those things have anything to do with what the schools' mandate should be: education.

Re: Landowner Sues After State Searches Property Without Warrant or Consent

#28

Post by ryandrake » Wed, Oct 23, 2024, 6:40 PM UTC

svieira wrote: post #8

> Beyond his main vocation as a chimney business owner, Thomas often drove for Lyft and Uber. After the criminal citation was filed, he automatically lost both driving jobs—banned by both companies due to the legal violation. For being found guilty (overturned on appeal) of fishing with more than 8 lines due to what is likely a vendetta on the part of the officer. A particularly succinct example of automated cruelty.…

Unfortunately, you can be denied employment for all sorts of unfair and ridiculous reasons--or for no reason at all. Not too much can be done without changing the law. I remember filling out a job application some time ago where one of the questions was "Have you ever been charged with a crime?" Not "convicted of". It wasn't a mistake, either. There was a footnote that said "You must answer YES to this question even if the charge was dismissed or you were found not guilty in court."

Re: Landowner Sues After State Searches Property Without Warrant or Consent

#29

Post by crisdux » Wed, Oct 23, 2024, 6:40 PM UTC

crooked-v wrote: post #5

I'm badly split on Institute for Justice, the nonprofit backing this suit. On the one hand, they aggressively advocate for obvious constitutional rights cases like this one and have put a lot of effort into fighting legally-accepted-yet-fundamentally-nonsensical practices like civil forfeiture. On the other, they also aggressively support school vouchers, which are mostly a scheme to drain money from public schools i…

In communities near me, recent expansions of school vouchers has been a game changer. Public schools are struggling and private schools give students a much better education. Public schools were failing well before private school vouchers existed.

Re: Landowner Sues After State Searches Property Without Warrant or Consent

#30

Post by riskable » Wed, Oct 23, 2024, 6:41 PM UTC

Joker_vD wrote: post #17

gs17 wrote: post #3

IJ has a few similar cases: https://ij.org/issues/ijs-project-on-the-4th-amendment/open-... The idea that state officials can trespass on your land and plant cameras (or steal yours) without even a suspicion of a crime is absurd, even if just for how much danger it puts the state employees in.

I imagine the state sees the land as their property, which private individuals don't, strictly speaking, own but merely hold infinite lease on (land tax = rent price, eminent domain = one-side lease termination with compensation, etc). This legal philosophy arguably makes some theoretical sense but has rather unpalatable practical consequences.

It's not a "legal philosophy" that's how states work (i.e. it is their land). The state always controls all the land within its borders. "Ownership" is a tradeoff: Individuals get to do what they want (for the most part) with the land and also get protection by the state against crimes/disasters (e.g. fire) that occur within that property while the state gets tax revenue.

If you 100% truly owned your own land you'd be the monarch of your own state.

In this legal case the state is policing their water/fish on behalf of all the other property owners in the area as well as anyone that would benefit from said water/fish (downstream impacts, as it were).