Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: MI Constitution Art. 1 Sec. 11; Illegal search and Seizure

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Battle Creek, MI
    Posts
    578

    MI Constitution Art. 1 Sec. 11; Illegal search and Seizure

    § 11 Searches and seizures.

    Sec. 11.

    The person, houses, papers and possessions of every person shall be secure from unreasonable searches and seizures. No warrant to search any place or to seize any person or things shall issue without describing them, nor without probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation. The provisions of this section shall not be construed to bar from evidence in any criminal proceeding any narcotic drug, firearm, bomb, explosive or any other dangerous weapon, seized by a peace officer outside the curtilage of any dwelling house in this state.
    What do you think, does this protect your private vehicle from a search or seizure without a warrant or probable cause?

    Illegal search and seizure is also protected under the 4th Amendment to the US Consitution.

    The question here is, under both sections in the MI and US constitutions, would that subsequently make MCL. 750.227 unconstitutional in respect to possession of a firearm in your vehicle? State and Federal .gov recognize your vehicle as your private property as it cant be searched without probable cause or a warrant. However under State law they disregard it as private property as MCL 750.227 regulates the possession of a firearm within your vehicle. If your vehicle was repsected as your private property as your home or other property you possess than a person would be able to possess a firearm in their vehicle just the same as they could in their home or private land and just the same as they cant search your home or private land without a warrant or probable cause.
    Last edited by Yance; 05-23-2012 at 03:33 PM.
    The worst weapon is the human mind, its created and done things far worse than a gun can, has, or ever will. Its the human mind that tells the gun what to do and animates the inanimate object.

    With all these gun control laws in place I have yet to find a single one that has saved someones life, but I can find hundreds of stories where a gun has.

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948
    Seems to me that although ti MI constitution does not look at a vehicle as protected as private property, that it does not prevent the lawmakers from including in into private property as we would like them to either.

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948
    Quote Originally Posted by Yance View Post
    What do you think, does this protect your private vehicle from a search or seizure without a warrant or probable cause?

    IMO No

    Illegal search and seizure is also protected under the 4th Amendment to the US Consitution.

    Absolutely, and I think your vehicle is included in the protections under the 4th Amendment.

    The question here is, under both sections in the MI and US constitutions, would that subsequently make MCL. 750.227 unconstitutional in respect to possession of a firearm in your vehicle? State and Federal .gov recognize your vehicle as your private property but under State law it is not regarded as private property.
    Could you perhaps rephrase this section?
    Last edited by stainless1911; 05-23-2012 at 03:17 PM.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Battle Creek, MI
    Posts
    578
    Quote Originally Posted by stainless1911 View Post
    Could you perhaps rephrase this section?
    Edited, hope it makes more sense.

    The part that gets me is it says "possessions"

    Webster defines possessions as:



    possessions plural of pos·ses·sion (Noun)

    Noun:

    1.The state of having, owning, or controlling something.

    So by that definition your vehicle would fall under "possessions" as listed in Art. 1 Sec. 11 of the MI Constitution, presumably making it your private property as it is protected from illegal searches and seizures.

    So if my vehicle is protected from illegal searches and seizures because it is mine, I own it, would any law that limits what I do within my private property therefore be unconstitutional?
    The worst weapon is the human mind, its created and done things far worse than a gun can, has, or ever will. Its the human mind that tells the gun what to do and animates the inanimate object.

    With all these gun control laws in place I have yet to find a single one that has saved someones life, but I can find hundreds of stories where a gun has.

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948
    Quote Originally Posted by Yance View Post
    Edited, hope it makes more sense.

    The part that gets me is it says "possessions"

    Webster defines possessions as:



    possessions plural of pos·ses·sion (Noun)

    Noun:

    1.The state of having, owning, or controlling something.

    So by that definition your vehicle would fall under "possessions" as listed in Art. 1 Sec. 11 of the MI Constitution, presumably making it your private property as it is protected from illegal searches and seizures.

    So if my vehicle is protected from illegal searches and seizures because it is mine, I own it, would any law that limits what I do within my private property therefore be unconstitutional?
    Aah, yes, a vehicle is a posession, then I think that you are right, that it would then fall under the protections of both the US and MI constitutions.

    They would need probable cause to look for those items, but how would the law, 227, be unconstitutional in and of itself?

  6. #6
    Regular Member zekester's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Uvalde, Texas
    Posts
    665
    Your vehicle is your possession, correct,,,,LEO cannot search your vehicle without your consent...period!!

    If you are pulled over ..(point here if you are driving)... for an infraction, and not arrested ( which i believe is BS, because not going on your way is considered an arrest)...believe me they will try....If you should get out of the vehicle, lock all doors...put keys in ur pocket and refuse under the 4th.

    Never ask..."Why am I being detained?"....

    Instead ask " Why am I being arrested?"
    Last edited by zekester; 05-23-2012 at 04:02 PM.
    GOD gave me rights!!!....The Constitutuion just confirms it!!

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Battle Creek, MI
    Posts
    578
    Quote Originally Posted by stainless1911 View Post
    Aah, yes, a vehicle is a posession, then I think that you are right, that it would then fall under the protections of both the US and MI constitutions.

    They would need probable cause to look for those items, but how would the law, 227, be unconstitutional in and of itself?
    .227 in and of itself would be unconstitutional in regards to vehicle possession because while in the confines of other property I possess I can carry or possess a firearm in any manner I wish because its considered my private property. .227 acknowledges other property that I possess but not my vehicle, which under the 4A and Art. 1 Sec. 11 of MI Const. my vehicle is my private property because it is my possession, I own it, as such I should be able to possess a firearm in any manner I wish within the confines of my privately owned vehicle the same as I can any other private property I possess. Thus by making the possession of a firearm within the confines of some private property legal but not other private property .227 remains an unconstitutional law.
    The worst weapon is the human mind, its created and done things far worse than a gun can, has, or ever will. Its the human mind that tells the gun what to do and animates the inanimate object.

    With all these gun control laws in place I have yet to find a single one that has saved someones life, but I can find hundreds of stories where a gun has.

  8. #8
    Regular Member OneForAll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Davison
    Posts
    279
    Quote Originally Posted by zekester View Post
    Your vehicle is your possession, correct,,,,LEO cannot search your vehicle without your consent...period!!

    If you are pulled over ..(point here if you are driving)... for an infraction, and not arrested ( which i believe is BS, because not going on your way is considered an arrest)...believe me they will try....If you should get out of the vehicle, lock all doors...put keys in ur pocket and refuse under the 4th.

    Never ask..."Why am I being detained?"....

    Instead ask " Why am I being arrested?"
    Good post, what about if a LEO gains probable cause like they do to obtain a warrant?

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948
    If a LEO gains probable cause, then they can search, that is provided to them in the constitution.

    If he abuses it, then the evidence can be thrown out.

    This does not change the unconstitutionality of 227 as Yance has pointed out in this thread.

  10. #10
    Regular Member OneForAll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Davison
    Posts
    279
    Quote Originally Posted by stainless1911 View Post
    If a LEO gains probable cause, then they can search, that is provided to them in the constitution.

    If he abuses it, then the evidence can be thrown out.

    This does not change the unconstitutionality of 227 as Yance has pointed out in this thread.
    I completely agree.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Clio, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    363
    Very interesting thread, I am glad that I read this one. Definitely brings new things to light.

    Devery

  12. #12
    Michigan Moderator DrTodd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Hudsonville , Michigan, USA
    Posts
    3,337
    The justification for searches usually hinges on the word "unreasonable". The courts have determined it is reasonable for a leo to search under a number of circumstances... so good luck with the "I need to give consent" belief. As an aside, the Michigan Supreme Court has determined that DUI checkpoints violate the Michigan Constitution, though are legal in many other states. The case Michigan v. Long, 463 U.S. 1032 (1983) was a Michigan case that went before the US Supreme Court. The Michigan Supreme Court based its decision on article 1, section 11 of the Michigan Constitution and believed that the search violated both the federal and Michigan constitutions. The case was later decided by the SCOTUS and was not found to violate the US Constitution. However, the Michigan Supreme Court ruling still holds for Michigan because the Michigan Constitution is presumably more protective than the US Constitution.

    http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/htm...3_1032_ZS.html

    
    Last edited by DrTodd; 05-26-2012 at 06:21 PM.
    Giving up our liberties for safety is the one sure way to let the violent among us win.

    "Though defensive violence will always be a 'sad necessity' in the eyes of men of principle, it would be still more unfortunate if wrongdoers should dominate just men." -Saint Augustine

    Disclaimer – I am not a lawyer! Please do not consider anything you read from me to be legal advice.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •