| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/14/2010 10:41:20 PM · #151 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
But I'm probably sure that if it's standard procedure that such an action doesn't need a warrant that some judge will yell at them for wasting her time. |
I'm pretty sure if it was a time-wasting standard procedure the case wouldn't have made it to the appellate court. Incidentally, does anyone know the original ruling, and which side appealed? |
|
|
|
10/14/2010 11:22:57 PM · #152 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
But I'm probably sure that if it's standard procedure that such an action doesn't need a warrant that some judge will yell at them for wasting her time. |
I'm pretty sure if it was a time-wasting standard procedure the case wouldn't have made it to the appellate court. Incidentally, does anyone know the original ruling, and which side appealed? |
Hmmm. I don't know. The ruling says "affirmed", but I guess that could either mean the original ruling or the appeal. But since they talk about the arguments of the defendant, I bet they are upholding the ruling as it was given by the lower court.
Also, the main argument had nothing to do with a warrant. It was like the third or fourth argument made and, to me, sounds like grasping at straws.
Message edited by author 2010-10-14 23:24:25. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/05/2025 02:45:54 PM EDT.
