Meth labs make for doubling in search warrants

JACKSON, Mo. -- Law enforcement officers in Cape Girardeau set a record for the number of search warrants issued in 2001, nearly doubling the number issued the year before.

According to the Cape Girardeau Prosecuting Attorney's office, there were 105 search warrants issued, compared to 52 in 2000.

Prosecutor Morley Swingle attributes the increase to a well-trained local police force and to the vigorous activity of the Southeast Missouri Drug Task Force.

He said 46 search warrants were filed by Assistant Prosecuting Attorney Angel M. Woodruff, who works closely with the task force. The majority of those warrants were prompted by increased methamphetamine activity in the area.

Officers in the county regularly attend search and seizure training sessions to learn when to contact a prosecuting attorney, file an affidavit and take their request to a judge.

"Sometimes you've got to type fast," said Swingle, who has been filing warrants for the prosecutor's office since 1982.

Judge's choice

A judge ultimately decides if a search is reasonable, weighing an individual's right to privacy against the government's responsibility to ferret out crime, Swingle said.

Swingle said the use of a search warrant is a way to "bulletproof" a case, whereas consent searches -- warrantless searches that occur after an officer has obtained verbal permission -- can draw out legal proceedings. Swingle teaches search and seizure law to municipal judges and also teaches a section on the subject at the university.

During a court hearing Thursday, Linda and Jimmie McKinney of Oak Ridge, Mo., told the judge that a SEMO Drug Task Force officer had no right to search their property in an Aug. 8 incident.

Brad Smith, a detective with the task force, testified that Linda McKinney gave him permission to search. The search resulted in officers finding marijuana, methamphetamine and materials for a meth lab.

Since officers didn't have a warrant, the judge had to decide who was telling the truth. He decided in Smith's favor.

When consent is challenged, a judge must decide whether circumstances demonstrate that consent was voluntary, Swingle said.

Some factors include:

Whether the individual granting consent is in custody

The number of officers

The degree to which officers emphasized their authority

Whether weapons were displayed

Possible fraud by officers

Whether the person consenting was intoxicated

The age, intelligence and education of the consenting individual

Length of questioning

The use of physical punishment, deprivation of food or sleep

Whether the person was advised of the right to refuse consent

Weighing all of these factors, Swingle said, if an officer can make a reasonable argument to get a search warrant, he should.

Obtaining physical evidence is always better for police, said Cape Girardeau Police Chief Steve Strong.

"I'd often rather have evidence than an eyewitness," he said. "Evidence doesn't get confused and doesn't make mistakes."

Exceptions to warrants

In some cases, search warrants are unnecessary.

If an officer finds legal cause for an arrest, the law allows searching the area within the person's reach. That includes nail scrapings and examining hands for gunshot residue.

At a bench trial Tuesday, 18-year-old Edward Bryan was convicted of firing a gun at his estranged girlfriend's door.

Physical evidence included a spent shell casing at the scene and gunshot residue on Bryan's hands.

In the case of exigent circumstances, sometimes called emergency exceptions, the prosecutor has to be able to prove that if officers had stopped to get a warrant, someone may have been injured or evidence would have been destroyed.

"Those police officers have to make these decisions in a split second," Swingle said. "That's why you want experienced officers on the street."

abuchanan@semissourian.com

335-6611, extension 160