Can a police officer lawfully order someone to enter their home if they are outside?

OC for ME said:

privacy issues, Katz v US has nothing to do with the OPs issue. Can a cop tell you to go back inside if you are outside your apartment? Technically he was on "public land" and the jury decided that he was likely preventing the cops from "taking care of the q-munity."
<SNIP>

Click to expand...

I am not so sure about the use of "public" land for the "common areas" of an apartment complex. Most complexes that I have seen have signs posted to protect trespass authority for non-residents.

carolina guy said:

I am not so sure about the use of "public" land for the "common areas" of an apartment complex. Most complexes that I have seen have signs posted to protect trespass authority for non-residents.

Click to expand...

"Public" as in it is not owned by you, you have conditional use because you are a resident. Where as I own the land that the public sidewalk was laid on via a easement.

OC for ME said:

"Public" as in it is not owned by you, you have conditional use because you are a resident. Where as I own the land that the public sidewalk was laid on via a easement.

Click to expand...

Then you could apply the same logic to the apartment itself. However, the tenant has contractually defined rights to use the common areas, the general public and the government does not.

The area of easement on your property effectively renders that area of easement no longer your property.

carolina guy said:

Then you could apply the same logic to the apartment itself. However, the tenant has contractually defined rights to use the common areas, the general public and the government does not.

The area of easement on your property effectively renders that area of easement no longer your property.

Click to expand...

Easements address use, not ownership.

You have use of property in a apartment complex, exclusively so regarding the interior of your apartment, you don't own anything there other than your personal possessions.

As long as you don't impede the cops, who are on your land, that you own, they can pack sand. Make sure you record the damage done by them, if any, and submit the bill to the city. Real property damage, not stepped on flowers.

Now, is a cop gunna tolerate you exerting your property right? On your own land? We know now that they will not in one apartment complex.

Cops are pretty smart and they have been stung too many times to be pushy on private land where the owner is not interfering with their duties. I have "trained", my little story, some of the cops in my little town and had a cordial discussion with the top cop after that incident. Saved us both time and money, then and in the future.

OC for ME said:

Easements address use, not ownership.

You have use of property in a apartment complex, exclusively so regarding the interior of your apartment, you don't own anything there other than your personal possessions.

Click to expand...

ownership n.legal title coupled with exclusive legal right to possession. Co-ownership,however,means that more than one person has a legal interest in the same thing.

Click to expand...

Use is a primary component of ownership. Try exercising exclusive ownership of that sidewalk in the front yard of a private home and see what happens. If you do not control it (ie. you cannot restrict access to it, build/destroy items within it) then you do not really "own" it.

Primus said:

Yet the police still go to work everyday and put their a** on the line for people when they don't "have" to.

Click to expand...

No they don't. That is utter rubbish. Police do the work they have voluntarily elected to do after freely evaluating the cost/benefit tradeoff of the job, just like every other employee. There is absolutely zero nobility inherent in police work. Zero. One may find as much or more occurrence of nobility jn any other profession, be it crab fishing, investment banking, prostitution, or something else. Do not pretend to altruism, Primus. Police are precisely as self-serving and mercenary as any other kind of worker.

The less you do "for" me, the better off I am.

()pen(arry said:

No they don't. That is utter rubbish. Police do the work they have voluntarily elected to do after freely evaluating the cost/benefit tradeoff of the job, just like every other employee. There is absolutely zero nobility inherent in police work. Zero. One may find as much or more occurrence of nobility jn any other profession, be it crab fishing, investment banking, prostitution, or something else. Do not pretend to altruism, Primus. Police are precisely as self-serving and mercenary as any other kind of worker.

The less you do "for" me, the better off I am.

Click to expand...

Agreed. I've watched a couple friends join various police forces. Cops might learn to talk about altruism later down the road, but they become cops for purely selfish reasons.

Which is fine, in and of itself. Even most genuine "altruism" is, if you dig deep enough, self-serving. That's the nature of being a social animal.

A cop called into a local radio talk show and his number one reason, his mind you, for becoming a cop was the job security.

carolina guy said:

Use is a primary component of ownership. Try exercising exclusive ownership of that sidewalk in the front yard of a private home and see what happens. If you do not control it (ie. you cannot restrict access to it, build/destroy items within it) then you do not really "own" it.

Click to expand...

Specious argument. Your misunderstanding of what a easement is does not validate your position. Public use does not remove/negate ownership. Try having the sidewalk (area) in the front yard of a private home removed from the tax rolls of the home owner and transferred to the town.

rapgood said:

Any LEO who "orders" me inside my house when I am lawfully outside gets his way. I go inside, over my objection. Then I get my way when I sue the SOB for false imprisonment.

Make sure it's all recorded. Otherwise the LEO's lies will prevail in court. And you can always tell when they are testilying... their lips are moving.

Click to expand...

+1

I have only observed one instance were a cop wasn't dishonest on a report or in the court. Trooper Thompson of WSP, I think he did it on purpose to get the infraction against my other half thrown out. He could have easily took another route still been honest and the tickets would have stuck. The judge was quick to notice the main flaw and toss both tickets out.

OC for ME said:

Specious argument. Your misunderstanding of what a easement is does not validate your position. Public use does not remove/negate ownership. Try having the sidewalk (area) in the front yard of a private home removed from the tax rolls of the home owner and transferred to the town.

Click to expand...

YOUR misunderstanding hardly negates my statement. (shades of non sequitur methinks) (*shrug*)

Freedom1Man said:

http://www.policechiefmagazine.org/...on=display_arch&article_id=341&issue_id=72004









https://www.firearmsandliberty.com/kasler-protection.html

Warren v. District of Columbia



DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services.







Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Department









http://www.copblock.org/27067/police-have-no-duty-to-protect-you/







I hope these help you

Click to expand...

Castle Rock v Gonzales

Its my favorite to quote because the police refused to help a woman being stalked by her estranged husband, whom she had a protective order against (piece of paper) and a psycho murdered his own children. Hard to argue with the facts. Cops do not protect you.

Grim, sorry to hear of your being maliciously prosecuted. They likely planned this from the start. The thin blue line strikes again. Cops being officers of the court are always afforded protection for their wrongdoing. Even Drew Petersen was protected and allowed to carry a gun while under investigation for the disappearances of two of his wives.

The last time I refused to ID, a deputy tried hitting me with her car. I was pretty aggressive and stood my ground and relayed live updates vis social media. I lied and said my broken phone was recording video when in fact it was not and the video app kept crashing. In the end, I went home and got a slanted article written about me in the paper and was attacked by FUDDS online, including one Doug aka Nightmare... but it seems I may be more than a few decades younger than you and a bit more imposing at 6'3 and that may definitely have influenced their choice to leave me alone. I'll be watching this thread. Take an active role in your defense, lawyers can get lazy, too. Good luck sir. Check your inbox.

carolina guy said:

Then you could apply the same logic to the apartment itself. However, the tenant has contractually defined rights to use the common areas, the general public and the government does not.

The area of easement on your property effectively renders that area of easement no longer your property.

Click to expand...

The side walk in front of my house is a good issue then. It was built by the city and every home owner has to make sure it is clear, this means the homeowner is responsiable to shovel the snow from the part in front of their property. If they don't the city will sue the home owner and if someone slips due to the home owner not keeping it free from ice the home owner can be sued. How does that work if the homeowner doesn't actually own it?

DocWalker said:

The side walk in front of my house is a good issue then. It was built by the city and every home owner has to make sure it is clear, this means the homeowner is responsiable to shovel the snow from the part in front of their property. If they don't the city will sue the home owner and if someone slips due to the home owner not keeping it free from ice the home owner can be sued. How does that work if the homeowner doesn't actually own it?

Click to expand...

I don't know the laws in your state, but it certainly doesn't sound "just" does it?

If you have a right-of-way/easement on your property and you cannot exercise exclusive control of that portion of the property, then you do not have 100% ownership of that portion of the property, do you?

Thankfully, we do not have that issue with our property, despite being in the city limits. However, if I was "responsible" to provide "safe travel" on a public right of way, I would certainly feel it was my "duty" exercise the ability to "close" that right-of-way in the event of "unsafe conditions."

I am sure that someone will argue that it is part of your "civic duty" to maintain/clean the sidewalk, but if that is taxed at the same rate as property in the city that doesn't have sidewalks, then I am not sure the "civic duty" argument would hold.

Another way to look at it--just because the city builds it doesn't necessarily (IMO) create an obligation to maintain the city's property. Who is responsible to repair sidewalk cracks/breaks in your city?

If they park a city vehicle in your front yard, do you have to wash it and check the tire pressure as well? What if they pass an ordinance requiring such, would you feel the same duty?

carolina guy said:

If they park a city vehicle in your front yard, do you have to wash it and check the tire pressure as well? What if they pass an ordinance requiring such, would you feel the same duty?

Click to expand...

That would be their mistake, I'm a medic not a mechanic. I pay the professionals to do take care of my vehicles for me.

DocWalker said:

That would be their mistake, I'm a medic not a mechanic. I pay the professionals to do take care of my vehicles for me.

Click to expand...

And I am a software developer, not a professional "sidewalk shoveler"...

carolina guy said:

And I am a software developer, not a professional "sidewalk shoveler"...

Click to expand...

I should try that next time I get a warning...maybe ask them to send someone out to do some "on the job training"....

DocWalker said:

I should try that next time I get a warning...maybe ask them to send someone out to do some "on the job training"....

Click to expand...

What does your city do if you have an infirm retired person who is unable to physically and financially shovel or pay for someone to shovel the sidewalk? Also, do they publish standards of what is "acceptable" clearing in order for the homeowner to avoid being forced to absorbe the city's sidewalk liability if someone slips on the city's sidewalk?

carolina guy said:

What does your city do if you have an infirm retired person who is unable to physically and financially shovel or pay for someone to shovel the sidewalk? Also, do they publish standards of what is "acceptable" clearing in order for the homeowner to avoid being forced to absorbe the city's sidewalk liability if someone slips on the city's sidewalk?

Click to expand...

They drag the old physically out in the street and play a tune on his knee caps (provided he still has them). They give you a warning ticket, then a ticket (you have to pay). I haven't pushed it past a warning that I got when I was gone for a couple weeks one year. I forgot to pull my crystal ball out and forcast the weather so I could get someone to do it for me. I'm afraid of the MAN.

I have a neighbor with a plow on a 4 wheeler that usally hits a couple of our seniors houses that live in our neighborhood.