Talk:Sneak and peek warrant

Suggesting merge to USA PATRIOT Act
This stub is a dictionary definition largely covered by the USA PATRIOT Act article. Shouldn't this page be merged (subject to WP:Verifiability) and redirected there? • Gene93k (talk) 18:01, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Could add a usage table
[[]] provides an excellent report of what crimes sneak and peek warrants are used for. ie, drugs take the lead at 62%, fraud 7% with terrorism bringing up the rear at 0.4%. Themania (talk) 03:15, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

'But is it legal? "I will make it... legal"'
The Third Amendment to the United States Constitution specifically prohibits the quartering of soldiers inside a home in the time of peace or war. For the duration of the time these police forces (ostensibly, in military style swat regalia) are in a residence conducting their sneak and peak warrant, without the consent of the owner, during daylight or night, they can avail themselves to all the facilities, use the bathroom, watch tv on the couch, check what's in the refrigerator, lay down and take a nap, and be protected from the inclement weather, sun, snow, and rain. Just being inside the building for any duration of time without the owners consent is obviously "quartering" of state forces and government personnel, not to mention, Breaking and Entering and Trespass. Simply switching on a light (or opening the refrigerator door even) would constitute theft of resources (the owner will be billed for power used by the power company), and escalate it to Burglary.

See also: Castle doctrine... "American legal doctrine that designates a person's abode (or, in some states, any place legally occupied, such as a car or place of work) as a place in which the person has certain protections and immunities and may in certain circumstances attack an intruder without becoming liable to prosecution." In the case of a Sneak and Peek warrant, the police forces are not announcing or identifying themselves as law enforcement officers with a legal justification for being there, and therefore would lose all protection of operating under color of law and lawful entry. 71.226.11.248 (talk) 15:46, 8 April 2012 (UTC)