What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Breaking Bad on AMC (2 Viewers)

Premier said:
Christo said:
Maurile Tremblay said:
Christo said:
It's my understanding that the police can only seize "contraband" that is in plain sight--such as drugs.
Click to expand...
This article seems pretty good, and says that, "[o]riginally, the plain view doctrine applied only to contraband but has been extended to evidence generally."
Click to expand...
Okay, but Hank's seizure of the book still seems to go beyond what that article says is permissible: A seizure is lawful under the plain view doctrine where the officer was in a place he or she had a right to be at the time the evidence was discovered and it is immediately apparent that the items observed are evidence of a crime. State v. Bone, 354 N.C.C. 1, 550 S.E.2d 482 (2001); State v. Mickey, 347 N.C. 508, 495 S.E.2d 669 (1998); State v. Harper, 158 N.C. App. 595, 582 S.E.2d 62 (2003). In the plain view context, the phrase immediately apparent is satisfied only where the police have probable cause to believe that what they have come upon is evidence of a crime. State v. Graves, 135 N.C. App. 216, 519 S.E.2d 779 (1999).The book was in a stack of books & magazines and had to be opened and read before it became apparent to Hank that it was actually evidence.
Click to expand...
Jesus Christ.
Click to expand...
No, just Christo.

 
Wow. Last episode was amazing.

Total curveball that Hank was really behind all of it. I didn't see that coming. Do you think they'll show a bunch of flashbacks of Hank and Gus working together to fill in the gaps?

 
Officer Pete Malloy said:
Wow. Last episode was amazing.

Total curveball that Hank was really behind all of it. I didn't see that coming. Do you think they'll show a bunch of flashbacks of Hank and Gus working together to fill in the gaps?
Click to expand...
Hank and Gus always made sure the only place they were together was at DEA/police functions. Marie was their go-between on all important matters.

 
Premier said:
Christo said:
Maurile Tremblay said:
Christo said:
It's my understanding that the police can only seize "contraband" that is in plain sight--such as drugs.
Click to expand...
This article seems pretty good, and says that, "[o]riginally, the plain view doctrine applied only to contraband but has been extended to evidence generally."
Click to expand...
Okay, but Hank's seizure of the book still seems to go beyond what that article says is permissible: A seizure is lawful under the plain view doctrine where the officer was in a place he or she had a right to be at the time the evidence was discovered and it is immediately apparent that the items observed are evidence of a crime. State v. Bone, 354 N.C.C. 1, 550 S.E.2d 482 (2001); State v. Mickey, 347 N.C. 508, 495 S.E.2d 669 (1998); State v. Harper, 158 N.C. App. 595, 582 S.E.2d 62 (2003). In the plain view context, the phrase immediately apparent is satisfied only where the police have probable cause to believe that what they have come upon is evidence of a crime. State v. Graves, 135 N.C. App. 216, 519 S.E.2d 779 (1999).The book was in a stack of books & magazines and had to be opened and read before it became apparent to Hank that it was actually evidence.
Click to expand...
Jesus Christ.
Click to expand...
Cap, check your PMs please.

 
Christo said:
Politician Spock said:
Christo said:
Sarnoff said:
dparker713 said:
Leaves of Grass is inadmissible. Hank took it without a warrant.
Click to expand...
Did you miss the discussion around episode 1? No warrant needed for plain sight.
Click to expand...
Search and seizure. While it may have been in plain sight, he still needed a warrant to seize it.
Click to expand...
It was neither an illegal search, nor an illegal seizure. If one is warranted, so is the other. They aren't mutually exclusive of each other. By being an invited guest, it's all warranted.
Click to expand...
You're going to have to provide a citation for that. It's my understanding that the police can only seize "contraband" that is in plain sight--such as drugs.
Click to expand...
:doh:

 
Maik Jeaunz said:
Bryan Cranston is freaking fantastic. that video confession was money.
Click to expand...
This episode was Cranston at his best. That scene, the one with Walt Jr. and Jesse were all brilliant. I loved how he played Junior. Complete and total mind f and got exactly the reaction he anticipated.

 
didn't the first "last" episode start with Walt going into his fenced-off house and fetching the ricin? meaning the house doesn't get burned down? I'm in on the Junior-eating-fruit-loops bandwagon :thumbup:

 
Maurile Tremblay said:
I don't do criminal law, but I've read a few things about the exclusionary rule on the Internet.

It's true that consent to a search (or, in this case, consent to simply being on the property and acting like a normal houseguest) doesn't automatically include consent to seize any evidence found during the search. Whether a warrant is required to seize such evidence will depend on the totality of the circumstances -- how easy is it for the property to be destroyed while waiting for a warrant, etc. I don't think the answer is completely clear cut in this case.

I also think the plain view exception is relevant. A warrant is not needed to seize evidence in plain view. For an item to be considered "in plain view," an officer can't move stuff around during a search to reveal it. But in this case, magazines were moved around and the book was revealed not when an officer was conducting a search, but when a houseguest was taking a dump. Once the book was revealed -- incident to a dump, not to a search -- it was then in plain view. If the houseguest had been a non-cop rather than an off-duty cop, and he inadvertently revealed the evidence in front of a cop so that it was then in plain view, I think the cop could seize it without a warrant (provided that the cop was on the premises legally -- e.g., with consent). The water is muddied here because the houseguest and the cop are the same person; but I wouldn't give up that fight if I were the prosecutor.

I don't think Hank took Leaves of Grass with the idea that it would be admissible. Even if it's admissible, it's pretty weak as evidence that Walt is Heisenberg. So I don't think its admissibility matters very much. But as for whether it really would be admissible, I don't think it's completely black and white. I think it's an interesting enough question that it could appear on a crim pro exam.
Click to expand...
I'd be shocked if a court claimed that Walt had given Hank consent to search. Not only is Hank a social guest, he's a licensee as Walt's brother-in-law. He was off duty and there is zero indication he was granted permission to be there as a law enforcement officer.

 
So at this point does anyone buy family as Walt's motivation? Seems like he's completely ego driven. He's had no problem turning on Hank, he'll probably have no problem turning on Jesse - and these are people he'd actually attempted to protect in the past. I wonder how much Skyler really means to him at this point. His kids might be the only thing he values more than his ego gratification - and I wonder about that too.

 
In Walt's defense, he turned on Hank because Hank made it clear he wasn't going to let it go. Had Hank backed off during the lunch meeting Walt likely doesn't give him the CD. That was Walt's insurance in case Hank wouldn't back down. Brilliant move on his part.

 
dparker713 said:
Maurile Tremblay said:
I don't do criminal law, but I've read a few things about the exclusionary rule on the Internet.

It's true that consent to a search (or, in this case, consent to simply being on the property and acting like a normal houseguest) doesn't automatically include consent to seize any evidence found during the search. Whether a warrant is required to seize such evidence will depend on the totality of the circumstances -- how easy is it for the property to be destroyed while waiting for a warrant, etc. I don't think the answer is completely clear cut in this case.

I also think the plain view exception is relevant. A warrant is not needed to seize evidence in plain view. For an item to be considered "in plain view," an officer can't move stuff around during a search to reveal it. But in this case, magazines were moved around and the book was revealed not when an officer was conducting a search, but when a houseguest was taking a dump. Once the book was revealed -- incident to a dump, not to a search -- it was then in plain view. If the houseguest had been a non-cop rather than an off-duty cop, and he inadvertently revealed the evidence in front of a cop so that it was then in plain view, I think the cop could seize it without a warrant (provided that the cop was on the premises legally -- e.g., with consent). The water is muddied here because the houseguest and the cop are the same person; but I wouldn't give up that fight if I were the prosecutor.

I don't think Hank took Leaves of Grass with the idea that it would be admissible. Even if it's admissible, it's pretty weak as evidence that Walt is Heisenberg. So I don't think its admissibility matters very much. But as for whether it really would be admissible, I don't think it's completely black and white. I think it's an interesting enough question that it could appear on a crim pro exam.
Click to expand...
I'd be shocked if a court claimed that Walt had given Hank consent to search. Not only is Hank a social guest, he's a licensee as Walt's brother-in-law. He was off duty and there is zero indication he was granted permission to be there as a law enforcement officer.
Click to expand...
He didn't do a search. But he had consent to do exactly what he did* -- to read magazines while taking a dump.

_____

*At least up until the point of the seizure.

 
Maurile Tremblay said:
dparker713 said:
Maurile Tremblay said:
I don't do criminal law, but I've read a few things about the exclusionary rule on the Internet.

It's true that consent to a search (or, in this case, consent to simply being on the property and acting like a normal houseguest) doesn't automatically include consent to seize any evidence found during the search. Whether a warrant is required to seize such evidence will depend on the totality of the circumstances -- how easy is it for the property to be destroyed while waiting for a warrant, etc. I don't think the answer is completely clear cut in this case.

I also think the plain view exception is relevant. A warrant is not needed to seize evidence in plain view. For an item to be considered "in plain view," an officer can't move stuff around during a search to reveal it. But in this case, magazines were moved around and the book was revealed not when an officer was conducting a search, but when a houseguest was taking a dump. Once the book was revealed -- incident to a dump, not to a search -- it was then in plain view. If the houseguest had been a non-cop rather than an off-duty cop, and he inadvertently revealed the evidence in front of a cop so that it was then in plain view, I think the cop could seize it without a warrant (provided that the cop was on the premises legally -- e.g., with consent). The water is muddied here because the houseguest and the cop are the same person; but I wouldn't give up that fight if I were the prosecutor.

I don't think Hank took Leaves of Grass with the idea that it would be admissible. Even if it's admissible, it's pretty weak as evidence that Walt is Heisenberg. So I don't think its admissibility matters very much. But as for whether it really would be admissible, I don't think it's completely black and white. I think it's an interesting enough question that it could appear on a crim pro exam.
Click to expand...
I'd be shocked if a court claimed that Walt had given Hank consent to search. Not only is Hank a social guest, he's a licensee as Walt's brother-in-law. He was off duty and there is zero indication he was granted permission to be there as a law enforcement officer.
Click to expand...
He didn't do a search. But he had consent to do exactly what he did* -- to read magazines while taking a dump.

_____

*At least up until the point of the seizure.
Click to expand...
He may have grunted and clinched a couple of times but I wouldn't call it a seizure.

 
Gr00vus said:
So at this point does anyone buy family as Walt's motivation? Seems like he's completely ego driven. He's had no problem turning on Hank, he'll probably have no problem turning on Jesse - and these are people he'd actually attempted to protect in the past. I wonder how much Skyler really means to him at this point. His kids might be the only thing he values more than his ego gratification - and I wonder about that too.
Click to expand...
Really? I thought the speech on the floor was telling. He's ego driven until the cancer returned and he seemed to remember why he started this. The two aren't mutually exclusive.

 
Never really bought into the notion that if Hank turned Walt in it would automatically make him an inept DEA officer and ruin his career. Not like it's been 10 years running. Taking down the biggest meth dealer in about a year is no small feat. Hank gunned down during this time and his BIL was able to use his proximity to Hank to even further thwart him. Yet Hank still cracked the case.

He brought down the biggest drug kingpin in the Southwest in a year and didn't hesitate to turn in his own BIL. Wouldn't imagine people would be mocking him.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
pollardsvision said:
Gr00vus said:
Officer Pete Malloy said:
Good Posting Judge said:
Would Hank really ever thumb through Leaves of Grass?
Click to expand...
:lmao:
Click to expand...
It was either that or Cosmopolitan.
Click to expand...
I don't buy, for a second, that he picks Leaves of Grass over Cosmo.

I doubt that was one of the choices anyway. I don't think Sklyer was excited to read a "51 ways to give your man the best orgasm of his life" article.
Click to expand...
Remember that the name "Walt Whitman" is already in the back of Hank's head thanks to Walt explaining the "W.W." in Gayle's 6th grade girl note to Walt. He very well could have picked up "Leaves of Grass" and said "Huh, 'by Walt Whitman'. That's what that fruit-loop Gayle was writing about".

Then again Hank may not be as dumb as he lets on. Pretty sure he mentioned before that he went to college.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
pollardsvision said:
Gr00vus said:
Officer Pete Malloy said:
Good Posting Judge said:
Would Hank really ever thumb through Leaves of Grass?
Click to expand...
:lmao:
Click to expand...
It was either that or Cosmopolitan.
Click to expand...
I don't buy, for a second, that he picks Leaves of Grass over Cosmo.

I doubt that was one of the choices anyway. I don't think Sklyer was excited to read a "51 ways to give your man the best orgasm of his life" article.
Click to expand...
You're right - at least the top magazine looks like some kind of cooking/better living kind of magazine.

 
My apologies if someone has posted this thought...

While we are all focused on Jesse's gasoline pouring rage, his attempt to potentially burn down the White house, and who (or what) stops him from doing so, I think we are overlooking a huge potential effect of this:

From flash forwards, we obviously see that the White house doesn't burn to ground, but it appears that the kitchen area might have fire damage, and looks scorched.

I think there is a strong possibility that Jesse's fire, while not taking completely, does manage to do damage. The most important of which is it destroys Walt's lottery tickets with coordinates to the buried money.

Without the coordinates is Walt able to relocate the buried money? And if not, is that the driving factor to him to have to start cooking again?

 
Daywalker said:
Never really bought into the notion that if Hank turned Walt in it would automatically make him an inept DEA officer and ruin his career. Not like it's been 10 years running. Taking down the biggest meth dealer in about a year is no small feat. Hank gunned down during this time and his BIL was able to use his proximity to Hank to even further thwart him. Yet Hank still cracked the case.

He brought down the biggest drug kingpin in the Southwest in a year and didn't hesitate to turn in his own BIL. Wouldn't imagine people would be mocking him.
Click to expand...
Hank brought it up in the episode, how his boss, whose job Hank has now, was fired for socially knowing Gus Fring and not realizing he was a drug kingpin.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Ministry of Pain
The Tourist on Netflix
Replies
2
Views
215
CGRdrJoe
CGRdrJoe
SwampDawg
Open Mic on Sirius XM Fantasy Show
Replies
2
Views
1K
nightmare
nightmare
JAA
Has anyone spoke to their kids varsity sports coach? How did it go?
2
Replies
56
Views
2K
cheese
cheese

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Top