4th Amendment Follies
The American Civil Liberties Union has just become everybody’s new best friend. A recent ruling by the Indiana Supreme Court held that there was no right to reasonably resist police if they enter your home illegally. The ruling stems from the case of Barnes v. State of Indiana.
The case stemmed from an incident in November 2007, where police responded to a domestic violence call. The defendant, Richard Barnes, was involved with a dispute with his wife. He was leaving his apartment when police arrived in the parking lot. They questioned him and Barnes became agitated and started yelling. Police told him if he did not calm down, he would be arrested for disorderly conduct. Barnes went back into his home, police followed. He tried to shut the door and stop them from coming in. A scuffle ensued and Barnes was tazed and later arrested.
At trial Barnes’ attorney tried to get a jury instruction which said he had a common law right to resist an illegal entry into his home by police. The trial court denied that instruction. The case made it to the Indiana Supreme Court which ruled there is no right to reasonably resist police when they come into your home, even if the entry is illegal. The Court held the safety of the police trumps the individual’s right to privacy. The Court also said that individuals who are wronged by police have a number of remedies at their disposal, i.e. the exclusionary rule and civil lawsuits.
This is one of those cases where I can see both sides of the argument, however, I think a more narrow holding would have been in order. For one thing, in some cases we don’t know whether the entrance will illegal until after the fact (i.e. defective warrant or a mistake by officers) so I have no desire for a layman to make that call, that’s what courts are for. I also don’t want unscrupulous individuals using their law enforcement position to enter a home and harass someone because they have an axe to grind. Or worse, the bad guys posing as law enforcement.
I think the Court as a whole overreached and could have adopted the position of Justice Dickson in saying while there is a right to reasonably resist (which does not mean batter an officer) Barnes’ case doesn’t get out of the gate because police are responding to a domestic violence call and because of the very nature of domestic violence cases, police had every right to enter into the home.
That would have been a much better holding which would have preserved the integrity of the case, while at the same time not treading on the 4th Amendment.
You can read the case of Barnes v. State of Indiana here.
